EPA-600/5-73-016
                                                         February 1974
        ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
                              By
                        Steve Carter
                        Murray Frost
                        Claire Rubin
                          Lyle Sumek
                     Grant  No.  R-80137^
                   Program  Element 1HA097
                      Project  Officer

                       Alan  Neuschatz
          Washington Environmental Research  Center
                  Washington,  D.  C.  20^60
                         Prepared For
             OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
            U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                  WASHINGTON,  D. C.  20460
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20102 - Price $3.80

-------
                            ABSTRACT
This report presents the results of a study of environmental
management and local government.  The study has two main components:
(1) a survey of chief executives in cities over 10,000 population
and counties over 50,000; and,  (2)  a series of field studies  of local
environmental management in Dallas, Texas; Inglewood, California;
Miamisburg, Ohio; and the Piedmont Triad Region (Forsyth and  Guilford
Counties), North Carolina.

The major topics covered in the study include:  perception of the
definition of environment,  priority of environment as a local policy
issue, and types of environmental problems facing each local  govern-
ment; adoption of local  policy statement on the environment;  existence
of citizen environmental boards, environmental agencies, environmental
sections in master plans, land use controls, other environmental con-
trols, moratoria, environmental quality standards, environmental
impact assessment procedures, environmental law suits, tax incentives
and penalty charges; factors contributing to and factors creating
obstacles to development of environmental programs; and, relations with
state and federal agencies.

This report was submitted in fulfillment of Project Number R-801324
by the International City Management Association under the sponsorship
of the Environmental Protection Agency.  Work was completed in July,
1973.
                                i i

-------
                                CONTENTS
Abstract                                                              ii

List of Tables                                                        v

Acknowledgements                                                      xi

Sect ions

I        Conclusions                                                   1

II      Survey of Local Environmental Management

        A.   Local Environmental Management: Forecast                 11
             For Change

        B.   Survey of Local Environmental Management                 20

        C.   Environment as a Policy Issue                            23

        D.   Organizational Aspects of Environmental
             Management                                               30

        E.   Utilization of Environmental Management
             Strategies                                               38

        F.   Evaluation of Environmental Management
             Strategies                                               55

        G.   Factors Contributing to Development
             of Environmental Management Programs                     67

        H.   Intergovernmental Relations                              70

        I.   Problems  in Environmental  Management                     78

        J.   Appendices

             1.   Environmental Management and Local
                  Government Questionnaire - 1973                     83

             2.   Survey Tables                                       91

             3-   Recipients of Federal Part of Survey                217
                                  i i i

-------
Ill     Field  Studies  in  Local  Environmental  Management

       A.    Field  Studies  in  Local  Environmental  Management          218

       B.    Local  Organization for  Environmental  Management          224

       C.    Strategies for  Environmental  Management                  2k~}

       D.   Appendices

            1.   Critical Variables and  Related  Research
                Questions                                           263

            2.   Report  on  the Field Trip to Dallas,  Texas           267

                Addendum a.   Ordinance  No.  13113                   290

                Addendum b.   Ordinance  No.  13^9                   291

                Addendum c.   Ecological  Study Natural
                              Resource Variables                    29**

                Addendum d.   Ecological  Study Sample Maps           296

            3.   Report  on  the Field Trip to Inglewood, California  298

                Addendum a.   Environmental  Impact  Study
                              Guidelines                             3'6

                Addendum b.   Adverse Impact Unit Determination     319

                Addendum c.   Environmental  Clearance Statement     322

                Addendum d.   Conditions  Required by  the  City
                              Plannning  Commission  and  the
                              Environmental  Review  Committee for
                              Expansion  of Auto  Sales Lot           325

                Addendum e.   Property Maintenance  Violations       327

            k.    Report  on  the Field Trip to Miamisburg,  Ohio       328

                Addendum a.   References                             3^8

                Addendum  b.   Ordinance  1835                        351

                Addendum  c.   "1973" Contractual Agreement           351*

                Addendum d.   Amended Agreement                      356
                                  IV

-------
5.   Piedmont Triad Region, North Carolina

     Addendum a.   Excerpts from Forsyth County (N.C.)
                  Study of "The Feasibility of an
                  Ordinance Requiring Environmental
                  Impact Statements"                         385

     Addendum b.   Ordinance Requiring Environmental
                  Impact Statement                           388

-------
                              TABLES


No.                                                             Page

1     City Response Rate                                           91

2    County Response Rate                                         92

3    City Definition of "Environment"                             93

A    County Definition of "Environment"                           9*»

5    City Rated Severity of Environmental  Problems                95

6    County Rated Severity of Environmental  Problems              96

7    City Ranked Importance of Environment as Issue               97

8    City Ranked Local Issues                                     98

9    City Statement of Environmental Policy                       99

10   Year City Environmental Statement Adopted                    10°

11   County Statement of Environmental Policy                     101

12   Year County Environmental Statement Adopted                  102

13   City Environmental Department                                103

14   City Staff Environmental Committee                           10^

15   Designated City Environmental Official                        105

16   Primary Functions of Separate City Environmental  Department  106

17   Primary Functions of Cfty Environmental Section Part of
     Another Agency                                               107

18   Year City Environmental Department Established               108

19   Title of a Designated City Environmental Official             109

20   Primary Environmental Functions of Designated City Official  110

21   County Environmental Department                              111

22   County Staff Environmental Committee                         112
                                vl

-------
No.

23  Designated County Environmental Official                     113

2k  Primary Functions of County Environmental Department         114

25  Title of Designated County Environmental Official             115

26  Primary Environmental Functions of Designated County
    Officials                                                    116

27  Expansion of Pre-existing City Citizen Boards of
    Commissions                                                  117

28  Creation of City Citizen Environmental Board                 118

29  Commissions Expanded by City to Include Environment          119

30  Primary Functions of City Citizens Commission                120

31  Specialized City Citizen Environmental Commissions           121

32  Type of Specialized City Citizen Environmental
    Commission                                                   122

33  Expansion of Pre-existing County Citizen Boards
    or Commissions                                               123

34  Creation of County Citizen Environmental Board               124

35  Commissions Expanded by County to Include Environment        125

36  Primary Functions of County Citizens Commissions             126

37  Specialized County Citizen Environmental Commission          127

38  Type of Specialized County Citizen Environmental
    Commissions                                                  128

39  City-Enacted Land Use Controls                               129

40  County-Enacted Land Use Controls                             130

41  Other City-Enacted Controls                                  131

42  Other County-Enacted Controls                                132

43  Environmental  Section in City Master Plan                    133

44  Environmental  Section in County Plan                         134

45  City Adopted Environmental  Quality Standards                 135

46  County Adopted Environmental  Quality Standards               136
                               vii

-------
No.                                                                Page

kl   Environmental Areas Regularly Monitored By City                137

48   Environmental Areas Regularly Monitored By County              138

49   City Requirements for Environmental  Impact Statements           139

50   County Requirements for Environmental  Impact Statements

51   Authors of City Environmental Impact Statements

52   Authors of County Environmental  Impact Statements

53   Reviewer of City Environmental Impact  Statements

54   Reviewer of County Environmental  Impact Statements

55   City Imposed Moratoria in Last Two Years

56   Type of Delay Caused by City Moratoria

57   County Imposed Moratoria in Last  Two Years

58   Type of Delay Caused by County Moratoria

59   City Tax Incentives or Subsidies  to Improve the Environment    149

60   County Tax Incentives or Subsidies to  Improve the Environment  150

61   City Penalty Structure for Discharging Pollutants              151

62   County Penalty Structure for Discharging Pollutants            152

63   City Initiated Major Environmental Legal Suits in Last Two
     Years                                                          153

64   County Initiated Major Environmental Legal Suits  in Last
     Two Years                                                      154

65   Local Intergovernmental Service Agreements for Environmental
     Functions                                                      155

66   City Evaluation of Environmental  Agency                        156

67   County Evaluation of Environmental Agency                      157

68   City Evaluation of Citizen Environmental Advisory Board
     (Created)                                                      158

69   City Evaluation of Citizen Advisory Board Expanded  to  Include
     Environment                                                    159
                              vi i i

-------
No.                                                             Page

70   County Evaluation of Citizen Environmental  Advisory Board   160

71   County Evaluation of Citizen Advisory Board Expanded to
     Include Environment                                         161

72   City Evaluation of Intergovernmental  and Regional
     Arrangements                                                162

73   County Evaluation of Intergovernmental  and  Regional
     Arrangements                                                '63

74   City Evaluation of Land Use Controls                         16/*

75   County Evaluation of Land Use Controls                       165

76   City Evaluation of Environmental  Quality Standards          166

77   County Evaluation of Environmental  Quality  Standards        167

78   City Evaluation of Tax Incentives                           168

79   County Evaluation of Tax Incentives                         169

80   City Evaluation of Penalty Charges                           170

81   County Evaluation of Penalty Charges                         171

82   City Evaluation of Moratoria                                172

83   County Evaluation of Moratoria                              173

84   City Evaluation of Environmental  Impact Statements          17^

85   County Evaluation of Environmental  Impact Statements        175

86   City Evaluation of Law Suits                                176

87   County Evaluation of Law Suits                              177

88   Evaluated Effectiveness Index Scores  for Cities              178

89   Major Factors Contributing to Development of City
     Environmental Programs                                      179

90   Major Factors Contributing to Development of County
     Environmental Programs                                      180

91   Frequency of City Contact with EPA                           181

92   Evaluation of City Contacts with  EPA-Central  Office         182
                               ix

-------
No.                                                               Page

93   Evaluation of City Contacts with EPA-Regional  Office         183

94   Evaluation of County Contacts with EPA-Central  Office        184

95   Evaluation of County Contacts with EPA-Regional  Office       185

96   City Proposed Federal  Environmental  Impact Statement         '86

97   Federal  Impact Statements reviewed by Cities                 187

98   Type of City Project with Federal  Environmental  Impact
     Statements                                                   188

99   Types of Projects Where Federal  Environmental  Impact
     Statements are Reviewed by Cities                             189

100  Authors of Federal Environmental Impact  Statements  on
     City Projects                                                19°

101   County Prepared Federal Environmental Impact Statements       191

102  Federal  Impact Statements Reviewed by Counties               192

103  Type of County Projects with Federal  Environmental  Impact
     Statements                                                   '93

104  Type of Projects Where Federal Environmental Impact
     Statements Are Reviewed by Counties                          '94

105  Authors of Federal Environmental Impact  Statements  on
     County Projects                                              '95

106  Effect of Federal Environmental  Impact Statements
     Prepared By Cities                                           196

107  Effect of Federal Environmental  Impact Statements Reviewed
     by Cities                                                    '97

108  City as Object of Environmental  Suit  in  Last Two Years       '98

109  Party Bringing Suit Against City                             '99

110  County as Object of Environmental  Suit in Last Two Years     200

111  Party Bringing Suit Against County                           20'

112  City Compliance Difficulties with State  and Federal
     Standards                                                    202

113  County Compliance Difficulties with State and Federal
     Standards                                                    2°3

-------
No.                                                             Page

11A  Problems Encountered by Cities in Relations with States     20k

115  Problems Encountered by Cities in Relations with
     Federal  Agencies                                            205

116  Summary City Complaints                                     206

117  Problems Encountered by Counties in Relations with States   207

118  Problems Encountered by Counties in Relations with
     Federal  Agencies                                            208

119  Major Obstacles to Environmental  Management in Cities       209

120  Major Obstacles to Environmental  Management in Counties     210

121  Types of Environment-Related Training Needed for City
     Management Staff                                            211

122  Types of Environment-Related Training Needed for County
     Management Staff                                            212

123  Areas of City Staff Competence                              213

\2k  Areas of County Staff Competence                            21^

125  Outside Environmental Expertise Utilized by City in Past
     Two Years                                                   215

126  Outside Environmental Expertise Utilized by County in
     Past Two Years                                              216
                              XI

-------
                        ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study was conducted by the International City Management
Association with the assistance of General  Research Corporation.
Claire Rubin, Director of the ICMA's Contract Research Center,
supervised the conduct of the study.  Principal responsibility for
the project was shared by Steve Carter, Project Director;  Murray
Frost, consultant for General Research Corporation; and Lyle Sumek,
Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Public Affairs, University
of Colorado.  Joan Werner and Mary Ann Allard provided key pro-
fessional support for the project.  Additional professional  support
was provided by A. Akhigbe Erumsele  and Wallace Johnson of  ICMA,
as well as Edward Dodson, William Hamilton, and Alan Eschenroeder of
GRC.  Stan Wolfson, Carol Pigeon, Laurie Frankel and Richard
Hofrichter assisted with the preparation and  implementation  of the
survey.  A special word of thanks should be expressed to Harriett
Davis and Shirley Bass for their assistance throughout the project.
Acknowledgement should also be given to the more than 1,200  city,
state, and federal officials who answered our questionnaires or gave
us personal  interviews.
                               XI I

-------
                             SECTION I
                            CONCLUSIONS

Environmental programs have become a major function for federal, state,
and local governments with respect to the investment of financial and
staff resources.  Programs range from retitling existing programs in
the language of the environmental movement,  to adding specific programs
aimed at improving the environment, e.g., upgrading a sewage treatment
plant, to reassessing the broad range services with regard to their
potential for improving or degrading the environment, such as through
environmental impact assessment.

While local governments have traditionally exercised responsibility for
many environmental programs, recent programs have resulted in increased
management problems.  Demand for new spending, need for new staff ex-
pertise, new political pressures, and the search for comprehensive and
long-range solutions are some of the added burdens on local officials.
Forced to seek new tools, local governments  have little experience from
which to draw.  New ideas attempted by a local government will most
likely not become widely known.  When information about new programs is
disseminated, seldom is any systematic evaluation available.  As a
result, the role of local governments and their problems and needs can-
not be defined accurately.  This not only retards the effectiveness of
local governments, but also of state and federal environmental programs,
which recently have had greater impact on local environmental activities,

In 1973 a survey of municipalities with 10,000 and over population
and counties over 50,000 was conducted, along with four field studies
of local governments.  Using the results of  these studies this report
discusses the environment as a policy issue, the wide range of programs
used by local governments in securing and maintaining environmental
quality, environmental relations with the federal and state governments,
and problems in managing the environment.
ENVIRONMENT AS A POLICY ISSUE

Initiation of an environmental program depends on how local officials
perceive the environment.   Do they use a narrow or broad definition?
How well do they understand environmental problems in their own com-
munity.  What priority do they assign to it?
Definition of Environment

The term "environment", lacking a standard, accepted definition, has
a wide range of meanings ascribed to it.  The survey posed four

-------
alternative definitions of "environment."  The first restricts the
definition to the "natural environment" or the categories of pol-
lution:  "air, noise, sewage, solid waste, toxic substances, water."
The second alternative broadens the definition slightly to add
"energy, historical preservation, land use, open space, radiation,
population, and wildlife preservation."  The third adds to all of
the above factors "aesthetics, health, housing, mass transportation,
recreation, streets, and highways."  The final definition is the
broadest, reflecting a "quality of life" scope, adding "economic
development, education, employment, public safety and welfare."

None of the four alternative definitions received support from more
than approximately one-third of the respondents.  More than half of
the cities (57%) and counties (58%) viewed the environment in one of
the two broader definitions.  However, the lack of consensus may be
a source of conflict, as officials in the decision-making process may
not share a common perspective.  Moreover, this difference would be
reflected in the type of environmental programs adopted.
Severity of Environmental Problems

Local governments were asked to rate the severity of environmental
problems— aesthetics, air, growth, land use, noise, radiation, solid
waste, wastewater, water supply  — in their community.  Of the nine
listed, land use was rated by cities as the most severe problem, with
growth, solid waste, and wastewater tied for second.  Counties rated
solid waste as most severe, followed by land use, wastewater, and
growth.  Although it is assumed that the ratings of severity reflect
the nature of the problem in the community, they may also be influenced
by the specific legal authority and the availability of expertise to
analyze environmental problems.  Generally, however, the more severely
a problem is perceived, the more likely a local government is to
attempt to solve it.
Ranking the Environmental Issue

While the environment is an issue of increasing popularity, most local
governments responding did not consider it one of their most important
issues.  Asked to rank crime, education, environment, housing/urban
blight, taxes, transportation, and welfare in order of importance, only
about one-third of the local officials responding ranked environment as
either the most important or second most important issue facing them.
They generally ranked taxes, housing and urban blight, and education as
more important issues than the environment.  However, the cities in the
West ranked the environment as the most important issue, and suburban
areas ranked the environment higher than Central cities.  Local govern-
ments perceive the environment as only one of a number of major issues,
suggesting that these programs do not enjoy a favored position in the
competition for scarce local resources.

-------
STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS OR POLICY

Concern for the environment as a policy issue may be expressed as a
statement of environmental goals or policy, adopted by the city's
legislative body or administration.  Such statements provide general
guidance for the entire city administration, covering the total range
of municipal activities, and how they are developed and implemented.

Explicit statements of environmental goals or policies are not typical
Of those cities responding, 20% have adopted a statement while 23%
have them under consideration.  Twenty-seven percent of the counties
have adopted statements and 2k% have them under consideration.  In
general, larger local governments located in the West are more likely
to have adopted statements.
ORGANIZATIONAL ASPECTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

One of the fundamental tasks of environmental managers is to organize
available resources to address specific problems.  Because organizing
involves the distribution of an agency's resources — staff, budget,
and authority -- it is a crucial determinant of program success.  As
local governments have assumed responsibility for various environ-
mental programs, they have traditionally established distinct orga-
nizational units, e.g., sanitation department, water department.
Other local departments with environmental  responsibilities might
include the planning department, health department, parks department,
and  inspection department.  As a result, environmental activities are
often fragmented between several agencies.

Three organizational alternatives were in the survey:  a separate
environmental department, a staff committee, and the designation of
a single individual with environmental responsibility.  The use of
the single official with primary responsibility for environmental
matters was cited by bQ% of the cities and  48% of counties, exhibiting
more popularity  in the smaller cities, where staffs tend to be smaller
and responsibilities tend to fall on a few  individuals, and in the larger
count ies.

Twenty percent of the cities and k2% of the counties responding had a
staff committee which meets regularly with  the specific task of con-
sidering environmental matters.  This committee may have responsibility
for a wide range of environmental problems, or a more limited charge,
such as the review of environmental impact  statements.  Ann Arbor,
Michigan, and Inglewood, California, are examples of these two types of
staff committees.

An environmental department or agency may take a variety of forms with
the primary distinction being whether the unit is a separate depart-
ment or part of another department.  Twenty-three percent of the cities
responding indicated having an environmental department or agency. Seven

-------
percent were separate units and 16% were part of another agency.
Counties riported ]8% and 37% respectively.  Examples of existing
environmental departments include:  the New York City Environmental
Protection Agency; S?mi Valley  (California) Environmental Services
Department; Palo Alto  (Cal ifornia) Envi ronmental Planning Office; and
Austin  (Texas) Off ice of Environmental Resources Management.  Dallas,
Texas, and Inglewood, California, each have one environmental section
in the planning department.
CITIZEN ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONS

Citizen interest in the environment has been particularly demonstra-
tive.  Most recently, federal environmental legislation, such as the
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 -- has specified a
major role for citizens.

Citizen boards or commissions are a common approach used by local
governments to involve citizens.  Predictably, the emergence of the
environment as an important public issue has led to the creation of
citizen environmental commissions.  According to the survey, nearly
one-fourth of the cities and 36% of the counties responding have
created such commissions.  Most of these commissions have a broad
mandate to investigate environmental  problems and advise the city;
few had any enforcement power.  Examples of citizen environmental
commissions may be found in Dallas (Environmental Quality Committee)
and Guilford County, N. C.   (Advisory Board for Environmental Quality).

In addition, over half the cities and counties responding reported
expanding the functions of an existing board or commission to include
environmental functions.  The commissions most likely to be expanded
are the planning commission and the parks and recreation commission.
The Community Environmental Commission in Inglewood, California, is an
example of this approach.
STRATEGIES FOR MANAGING THE ENVIRONMENT

A variety of strategies or tools are available to local governments
for dealing with environmental problems.  Most of these strategies
are "new" only because they have not been used specifically in response
to environmental problems.  Also, more recently, the focus of local
programs has  been to anticipate and prevent problems from occurring,
rather than to solve them once they arise.

Most strategies are applicable to more than one specific environmental
problem, although no one  is sufficient to deal with the broad range
of problems facing local governments.  The tools examined in the survey
are:  a conservation or environmental section in the local master plan;
iand use controls; other environmental controls; environmental impact
assessment; moratoria;  tax  incentives or  effluent charges; and legal  suits,

-------
Environmental Section in Master Plan

While the master plan or comprehensive plan is one of the oldest tools
for guiding urban development in use, only in recent years has there
been a movement to include a conservation or environmental section.
A comprehensive plan coordinates all of the elements that influence
physical development.  Clearly, environmental considerations deserve to
be included on that basis.

When queried about the existence of an environmental section in the
comprehensive plan of their respective cities, approximately one-fourth
of those responding indicated the adoption of such a section.  Nearly
one-third of the local governments reported that such a section was
currently under consideration.  Inclusion of an environmental com-
ponent is most common in the Northeast (40%), and is under considera-
tion most often in the West (48%).  The latter case Is due in large
part to a California state law requiring local governments to include
such an element in their plans.
Land Use Controls
One of the strategies most frequently utilized by local governments
in managing the environment is land use control.  While an extensive
number of land use controls exist across the country, the survey
identified nine controls to test the rate of utilization.  The nine
were architectural appearances, flood plain zoning, growth limitation,
historical preservation, marshland controls, open space zoning,
required  installation of public facilities by developers, dedication
of land for public purposes by developers, and zoning to protect the
natural resources.

The required installation of public facilities (e.g., sewers) by
developers was reported by 83% of the cities and 51% of the counties.
The type of facilities required was not reported.  The second highest
rate of utilization  by cities was for open space zoning (48%),
reported by 36% of the counties.  It is unclear, however, whether
open space zoning was understood to also refer to preservation.
Nearly one-half of the cities required dedication of land for public
purposes  (e.g., schools, parks, streets) by developers and have adopted
flood plain zoning.  Counties reported 29% and 33% utilization re-
spectively.  Other land use controls were used less frequently.
Other Environmental Controls

A number of other regulatory controls are available to local govern-
ments for addressing environmental problems.  They were asked to
identify which of the following nine additional controls had been
adopted by their community:  abandoned vehicle ordinance, tree pre-
servation ordinance, erosion control ordinance, grading  (excavation)

-------
ordinance, housing code, noise ordinance, restriction on nonreturnable
bottles, sanitation (refuse) ordinance, and sign ordinance.

The highest city utilization rate (84%) was shared by three controls:
sign ordinance, sanitation ordinance, and abandoned vehicle ordinance.
A large number of cities (80%) reported adoption of a housing code.
The only other control approaching 50% utilization was the grading
ordinance, acknowledged by 43% of the cities responding.  The only
control reported by over one-third of the counties was the sanitation
ordinance
Environmental Quality Standards

With an increased role for the federal and state governments in setting
environmental quality standards, many cities have eliminated their
environmental standards or have not developed any.  Some states pro-
hibit local governments from adopting their own standards.  The cities'
role is stronger, however, in those areas where they maintain some
program functions, such as water and sewerage systems.  In some cases,
e.g., air pollution, counties serve as the enforcement agents for the
state.

The survey results reflect these conditions.  Of the cities responding,
53% have adopted sewerage standards and 43% water standards, but only
18% have officially adopted noise or air quality standards.  Forty-one
percent of the counties have adopted sewerage standards, and 31% air
and water standards.  Only 6% have adopted noise standards.  The
results also indicate instances where standards are not being monitored
or enforced.
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

A number of local governments have developed their own procedures for
evaluating the environmental impact of projects.  According to the
survey results,  30% of the cities and 35% of the counties responding
have formal requirements for environmental impact statements.  However,
only 17% of non-western cities have some form of EIS requirement compared
to 70% of the western cities.  Western counties also dominate the use
of EIS.

While the processes used by most local governments are similar, there
is some variation in the types of projects requiring impact statements.
Criteria used to determine whether a statement must be prepared include:
public or private in origin, dollar value, number of dwelling units,
and type of action required by the local government.  Survey results
indicated that most local governments require statements on private
projects as well as public ones.

These results reflect the California EIS experience, where the Cali-
fornia Environmental duality Act requires local governments to prepare
impact statements on both public and private projects.

-------
Mora tor i a

Nearly one-fifth of all local governments responding acknowledged
imposing some type of moratorium within the past two years.  In some
cases the moratorium may be a temporary ban  while a study or a
facility is being completed.  In other cases, however, where the
problem may be seen as long term, the ban may be for a longer time.

The refusing of building permits is the most common type of ban imposed,
followed by prohibiting water and sewer connections and denying re-
quests for rezoning.  Examples of moratoria are:  Phoenix, Arizona —
ban on building permits in a proposed open space area; Fairfax County,
Virginia — refusing water and sewer permits in areas with inadequate
treatment capacity; and, several California cities -- denying requests
for rezoning until EIS procedures could be developed.  In Dade County,
Florida, a general moratorium authority has been enacted allowing the
county manager to declare a moratorium when necessary.

Although moratoria may be considered an admission by local officials
that previous planning or other programs have been ineffective, their
use may prove valuable if the delay is used to analyze alternatives
and to develop effective programs, rather than merely postponing the
resolution of the problem.  Their use frequently occurs as a result of
a crisis, and in those circumstances is probably least open to criti-
cism.
Economic Incentives and Effluent Charges

The survey disclosed that only 3% of the cities and 3% of the counties
responding use the tax incentive-subsidy approach.  This low utiliza-
tion rate may be due to a number of factors, including the uncertainty
about what comprises an economic incentive.  Other factors may include
limited legal authority to adopt economic incentives, reluctance to give
up scarce revenues and reluctance to "reward" polluters.

Some local  governments have been considering the reduction of property
taxes (by decreasing the assessed valuation) for land not utilized at
its maximum intensity, e.g., to encourage the maintenance of agricultural
land as a means of controlling rapid growth.  Other examples include
exemption of pollution control devices from property tax and tax-free
industrial  revenue bonds for the purchase of anti-pollution equipment.

Effluent charges are based on the assumption that the environment is
common or public property, and therefore any person or organization
causing environmental damage must pay for it.  These payments are based
on the amount and content of the waste discharged.  Effluent charges
are presently being defined by many local governments with respect to
sewerage surcharges and penalty fees.  Almost one-quarter of the local
governments indicated that they use effluent charges or some other
system of taxes or fines.  However, some may have interpreted this to
include any environment-related ordinance that might result in a fine.

-------
Initiating Law Suits

The courts have played an active role in environmental  protection.
Citizen-initiated suits against polluters are becoming  increasingly
common, and some states such as Michigan, have enacted  legislation
designed to encourage these suits.  Filing legal  suits  represents a
strategy available to local governments as well.   Of the cities
responding, 10% claimed to have initiated at least one  environmental
law suit.  Law suits were initiated by ]k% of the counties responding.

Law suits may be seen as an essential aid to an enforcement program
and for gaining compliance with environmental impact assessment pro-
cedures, but the process is slow and costly.  Delays and appeals are
likely, especially if the defendant has obtained  an injunction against
enforcement until the suit is settled.  An example of an extensive
environmental legal battle is the attempt by the  City of Inglewood,
California, to alleviate a severe aircraft noise  problem.
Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Strategies

All of the strategies tended to be rated as effective rather than
ineffective.  Local governments utilizing a strategy consistently
rated it more effective than non-users did.  Cities and counties agreed
on the four most effective strategies:  land use controls, environ-
mental quality standards, separate environmental agency, and economic
incentives.  Cities saw expanded citizen commissions as the least
effective strategy, while counties awarded that honor to environmental
impact statements and penalty  (effluent) charges.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS IN MANAGING THE ENVIRONMENT

Environmental management has traditionally been a local responsibility.
Throughout the twentieth century, however, there has been increasing
environmental activity at the state and federal levels.  As a result,
the relationships between the federal, state and local levels have
changed.  These changes have resulted in conflict and uncertainty.   In
addition, efforts to solve environmental problems have led to the
development of regional approaches, often resulting in the creation of
another  level of government and more changes in roles and responsibili-
ties.  The result is frustration and confusion.

City and county complaints about their relations with state and federal
governments were similar, with many citing inadequate funding.  There
was greater criticism of the federal government regarding program
administration.  States were subject to greater criticism than the
federal  government with regard to conflicting or unreal standards,
unreasonable enforcement measures,  inadequate local participation in
policy making, and inadequate technical assistance.  The survey results
verified the existence of widespread dissatisfaction.

-------
One aspect of the interaction between local governments and the
federal government concerns the participation of local governments
in the federal environmental impact statement process.  Many view
the EIS process negatively — 30% of those who have written or
reviewed statements indicate they have had no impact and nearly one-
half indicate they have consumed extensive staff time and delayed
projects.  But project improvement is cited by 19% of the cities and
28% of the counties who have written statements.

About half the cities and counties say they are having some difficulty
meeting state or federal  air or water pollution standards.  Fifteen
percent of the cities and 17% of the counties report being the object
of an environmental law suit within the past two years.  Nearly half
the suits against cities were filed by state or federal agencies,
although only 1^% of suits against counties were by these agencies.

Local governments, however, seem to be quite satisfied with their
contacts with EPA central and regional offices.   Only 9% of the cities
report their contacts with the central office are unsatisfactory; and
the same proportion indicates dissatisfaction with their regional office
contact.  But smaller, Western, and suburban cities have both less
contact and less satisfying contact with EPA.  Only 8% of the counties
rated their contacts with the central office as unsatisfactory, and
10% the regional office.
FACTORS AFFECTING DEVELOPMENT OF LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS

In order to determine the motivations of local governments to develop
environmental programs, the survey asked local officials to identify
the major factors contributing to and inhibiting the development of
environmental programs.  Nearly 70% of the cities and 77% of the
counties responding indicated that state and federal requirements were
a contributing factor.  The factor "concerned officials" was the only
one to receive a greater response (75%)  by cities.  Citizen support
was another important contributing factor; 50% of the cities and 5**%
of the counties listed public support and bk% and 58% active environ-
mental and civic groups respectively.  Surprisingly, only 38% of the
cities indicated state and federal financial incentives as a contri-
buting factor, although 51% of the counties cited this.

The major obstacle identified by about 70% of the local governments was
inadequate finances.   Over half of the respondents mentioned frag-
mentation of responsibility between levels of governments.  The third
most important obstacle listed was the lack of expertise.
CONCLUSION

Local governments have been acting carefully and deliberately in the
development of policies arid strategies to implement them.  As indicated
by the survey results, there are many reasons for this.  First,  local

-------
officials have no clear concept of the environment; no simple definition
exists.  The environment is understood as a complex, interrelated
problem requiring comprehensive, long range solutions.   The environ-
mental manager must develop new techniques and make organizational  changes
to gain effective utilization.

Second, environmental needs compete for scarce resources in local
governments.  New environmental programs require substantial funds  for
acquiring staff expertise or capital facilities, as do housing and
education problems, among others.

Third, there is an absence of proven environmental strategies or tools.
Efforts have refocused on existing tools, such as land use controls, because
many cities have limited statutory capability for innovation.  Even
when strategies have been developed, there has been little evaluation
of them or staff expertise employed to implement innovation.

Finally, there is confusion about roles and responsibilities among
levels of government.  This results in local frustration or inaction.
Most cities will not initiate programs if anticipated actions at the
federal or state level would cancel these efforts.  For example, local
governments will not adopt standards if they anticipate preemption  of
that function by the state.  Or, local governments will wait to build
sewage treatment plants until the federal government determines the
necessary water quality standards and what funding assistance is to be
made available.

These problems highlight the difficulties  involved  in managing the
environment or any program area characterized by rapid change.  The
result is a period of transition where problems are reevaluated, policy
redirected, new strategies selected, new resources  identified, and
strategies  implemented.
                                10

-------
                            SECTION II

             SURVEY OF LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT


A.  Local Environmental Management: Forecasts and Change

Since their inception, local governments in America have carried out
a variety   of environmental functions.  For nearly two hundred years,
local governments have been broadening their environmental  activities
at a relatively leisurely pace generally in response to community
needs.   In the past few years, however, a grand environmental  aware-
ness burst unexpectedly upon the national scene.  The original  Earth
Day, April 22, 1970, complete with teach-ins and rallies, was  the
first major indication of the popular strength of environmental con-
cern, a concern that has already brought about significant  changes in
programs and institutions at all levels of government.   The effect of
the "environmental movement" has been to accelerate the wheels of
change, resulting in major difficulties at the local level  in  managing
the environment.


ANTECEDENTS TO CHANGE

Environmental  programs traditionally have been part of  the  services
provided by local governments since colonial times.  The earliest
functions provided were police and fire, followed closely by roads,
wastewater disposal, water supply, and refuse disposal.  The potential
for health problems primarily motivated leading local governments to
assume responsibility for these environmental services.  Recorded
environmental  landmarks include the installation of sanitary sewers
in Boston in 1823 and the adoption of smoke controls by Chicago and
Cincinnati in 1881.

Local responsibility for environmental matters was altered little over
the years.  The scope of local programs remained essentially water
supply, sewage disposal, solid waste and parks and open space.  Most
local governments were organized by major programs, so  each of these
areas was placed under the jurisdiction of separate and distinct
departments, e.g., Water Department, Parks Department,  and the like.
Typically the duties of these departments were to provide sufficient
service capacity.  This translated into objectives such as  having
enough drinking water and being able to get rid of all  garbage and
sewage.

The early techniques used by local governments were not very sophis-
ticated.  At first, sewage was discharged directly into a nearby body
of water without benefit of any treatment.  Garbage was frequently
burned. As new technology was developed, attempts were  made to incor-
porate it into the  existing operation.  Of course this was not always
                               11

-------
the case.  Unfortunately, it was not uncommon for local  agencies to
look upon environmental problems entirely from a local perspective.
The effects of waste disposal upon neighboring communities were not
always considered.  In fact, as late as 1950 every major city on
the Missouri River, including Kansas City and St. Louis, was dis-
charging raw sewage into the river.  Likewise, environmental programs
were not frequently examined for the impact on other segments of
the environment.  The adequacy of local environmental programs be-
came even more difficult to maintain in rapidly growing  metropolitan
areas.

As a result, there has been a trend since around 1950 toward greater
state and Federal involvement in this once exclusively local sphere.
In 1955 Congress authorized the Public Health Service to conduct
research and provide technical assistance to state and local agencies
in the area of air pollution.  However, as late as 1961, only seventeen
states and eighty-five municipalities had programs involving expendi-
tures of $5,000 or more each year.  Only six states were engaged in
enforcement activities, the remainder confining their role to technical
assistance and encouragement of local programs.*  In 1963 Congress
enacted the Clean Air Act enlargening the  federal role in air pollu-
tion control.  The Act provided for expanded research and training;
grants-in-aid (up to two-thirds of the cost) to state and local agen-
cies; and direct federal enforcement activities in certain defined
interstate emergencies.  Amendments in 1965 and 1967 authorized
standards for automobiles, the designation of air quality control
regions, state standards and  implementation plans, and federal power
to step  in where state action is  inadequate.

Similar steps were taken to meet water problems.  The Water Pollution
Control Act was passed  in 1956 and amended in 1961 and 1965. The
initial  legislation encouraged state and local governments to step
up their own efforts to combat water pollution through program grants
and construction grants.  Gradually the federal role was expanded to
include establishment of water quality standards and implementation
for all  interstate and coastal waters.

Congress also responded to the solid waste problem with the Solid Waste
Disposal Act of  1965.  This Act provided for federal research, technical
assistance, demonstrations of new technology, and grants for state and
interstate solid waste planning programs.

In spite of the  increased state and federal involvement in environmental
programs, performance was still far from consistent.  In a report to
Congress in 1970, the following conditions were described:
*John C. Bollens and Henry J. Schmandt.  The Metropolis.  (New York:
Harper and Row, 1965), p. 325.
                               12

-------
      ."Less than one-third of the Nation's population is
       served by a system of sewers and an adequate treat-
       ment plant.  About one-third is not served by a
       sewer system at all.  About five percent is served by
       sewers which discharge their wastes without any
       treatment.  And the remaining thirty-two percent
       have sewers but inadequate treatment plants."*

      ."...of the fifty-five State and territorial [air
       pollution abatement] programs being financed by the
       grants of the program in 1970, only six have reached
       an annual per capita expenditure of twenty-five cents"
       (considered a minimum for state programs).  "At
       the local level, 	 sixty-four of ]kk grantee agencies
       are spending at least forty cents per capita per
       year" (considered a minimum for local programs).+

      ."[Solid Waste] disposal  facilities are equally inadequate
       and antiquated."  Estimates show that "ninety-four
       percent of existing land disposal operations and seventy-
       five percent of incinerator facilities are substandard."^

While the occurrence of crises, the publication of sympathetic books
(e.g., Rachel Carson's The Silent Spring) and the increased coverage
by all the media have aTTcontributed to public awareness and concern,
it is likely that increasing personal experience with "sensory shocks"
has been more effective in developing concern.  Such shocks include
burning eyes, smog-clouded scenery, waters banned for swimmers
and fishermen, litter, contaminated food, the demise of natural areas
falling wayside to new development, and the prospect of more and more
*First Annual Report of the Council on Environmental Quality (U.S.
 Government Printing Office, 1970), p. 35-

+lbid, p. 83.

*lbid, p. 106.
                               13

-------
people causing even greater environmental  abuse and deterioration.
These personal experiences seem verified by the results of contemporary
scientific studies showing irreversible damage to wildlife, harmful
chemicals in food and drugs, and so forth.

In a short period of time, the awareness and concern for the environment
has been transformed into a potent political force.  This has been
demonstrated by the actions recently taken by voters in bond elections,
elections for public office, and referrenda on environmental issues.
In an editorial following the election in November, 1972, the
Washington Post stated:

      Among other facts confirmed by the elections, it is clear
      now that concern for the environment is not the fad or
      passing whim many believed it was.  In large numbers of
      elections--in states, cities and neighborhoods where the
      issues were not abstractions but community realities that
      people must live with—voters supported either the pro-environ-
      ment candidate or the pro-environment referendum.  Often,
      this support came in full awareness of the cost:  environmental
      bond issues won in all parts of the country.  New Yorkers
      approved issuance of $1.15 billion in bonds for anti-
      pollution measures, Washington state voters agreed to $265
      million and Floridians $240 million.

      The more publicized environmental victories included the
      emphatic rejection of the 1976 Winter Olympics by Colorado
      citizens and the decision of Californians to preserve their
      coastline from over development. But less noticed triumphs
      also reveal the strength of the environmental movement.
      Senator Lee Metcalf's win in Montana, for example, suggested
      that his strong opposition to the strip mine, timber and
      power interests is shared by a majority of the voters.  In
      Colorado, Senator Gordon Allott, whose interest  in environ-
      mental cases can perhaps be measured by his support for
      the Olympic invasion, was defeated.  In other races—for
      Senate, House and governorships—the League of Conservation
      Voters endorsed 57 candidates (35 Democrats and 22 Republicans)
      and 43 won...*
EXPANDED STATE AND FEDERAL EFFORTS

The  increase  in public concern over the environment precipitated a
period of rapid and major change by federal, state and local govern-
ments.  Highlights of federal actions include:
*"The Environmental Veto," Editorial, Washington Post, November 19,
  1972.
                               14

-------
      .The National Environmental Policy Act of 1970, requiring
       environmental impact assessment of all federal projects
      .The Council on Environmental Quality, created in 1970 as
       an advisory body to the President
      .The Environmental Protection Agency, formed in 1970
       consolidating fifteen programs previously vested in a
       dozen agencies
      .The Clean Air Act of 1970, setting national standards for
       air quality and empowering the federal government to
       implement them if necessary
      .The Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, creating
       a permit program for all dischargers of liquid waste
       (including municipalities), setting standards, and working
       toward a goal of "zero-discharge" of pollutants into
       waters by 1985.
      .The Pesticide Control Act of 1972, requiring all  makers
       to register all  pesticides with EPA
      .The Noise Control Act of 1972, authorizing noise emission
       standards for construction and transportation equipment,
       motors and engines and electrical devices
      .The Land Use Act of 1973, encouraging states to prepare
       state land use[Mational] plans, designating critical
       environmental areas for special control.  [Legislation currently pending]

House Speaker Carl Albert reported that the 92nd Congress considered more
than 150 bills dealing with the environment and natural  resources,  and
more than ninety of them became law.

State governments have taken wide-ranging actions on environmental
issues also.  According to the Council of State Governments, nearly
every state legislature enacted laws to protect or preserve environ-
mental quality since 1970.   Among the actions taken by June, 1973 are:

      .Fourteen states passed legislation protecting water,
       coastlands and shorelands
      .At least ten states adopted regulations on noise
      .Seven states guaranteed the right to clean air and
       water in their constitutions
      .Twelve states passed laws establishing overall land
       use regulations
      .Six states (Connecticut, Florida, Massachusetts,  Michigan,
       Minnesota and Nebraska) allow citizens to file suit against
       polluters
      .Several  states enacted controls or bans on pesticides
      .Missouri, Arkansas,  Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Maryland,
       Ohio, South Dakota,  and Tennessee enacted legislation
       regulating surface and strip mining
      .A number of states created special departments for
       environmental affairs
      .California adopted an Environmental Quality Act in 1970
       requiring local  governments to investigate the environmental
       impact of all projects, public and private
                               15

-------
Other state programs include:  air and water pollution control,
regional solid waste disposal planning, and financial  assistance to
local governments for pollution control facilities.


LOCAL RESPONSE

As with the federal and state governments, public concern over the
environment has had a tremendous impact on local governments.  Many
have proceeded to develop a varied assortment of environmental programs,
plans, and controls.  The actions of local governments, however, are
not so easy to classify.  Not only do the number, size, composition,
and environmental needs of local governments promote diversity, but
their officials hold different opinions and philosophies as well.

The recent environmental movement met with mixed reaction from local
officials.  Typical responses are:  "We've been doing  environmental
programs for years before it became popular;" "we should not devote
any more resources to physical problems at the expense of 'people1
problems;" or "recognizing the importance of the environment was the
best thing that ever happened."

The first response mentioned reflects the traditional  role of local
government in the environmental area as discussed earlier.  This
view not only emphasizes the length of time that local governments
have been involved in environmental programs, but also the fundamental
nature of that involvement—they live with the problems, deliver the
service, and help pay for it.

Other local officials saw in the environmental movement an unwanted
diversion from "people-oriented" social programs, which have been
neglected so long  in our urban areas.  For those who feel the
problems of poverty and racism to be the major unresolved problems facing
the nation, environmental concern can be interpreted as another attempt
to  ignore the needs of the poor and the black.

A third set of officials were quick to realize the  importance of  the
environmental issue as it exists in their community today and capitalized
upon  it for developing a new set of environmental programs.  Some of
these programs include:

        .setting up an environmental unit within the organization
        .adding environmental input to the planning program
        .improving pollution control facilities
        .increasing the efficiency of solid waste collection
        .working with environmentally concerned citizens
        .developing procedures for controlling growth
        .evaluating the environmental impact of  local activities
                                16

-------
Even though the environmental movement has met with mixed reactions from
local officials, it is generally seen as having a major impact on:  (1)
the role of local government, and (2) the role of local administrators.
At a meeting in Minneapolis, local officials saw the potential impact of
the movement on local  government to be:  "increased complexity of decision
making;" "changes in resource allocation;" "require new technology;"
"require personnel  with new skills;" "greater citizen involvement;"
"greater intergovernmental cooperation;" "creation of special purpose
agencies;" "responsibilities assigned to higher levels of government;"
"inclusion of quality-of-1ife factors in decision making."*

The perceived impacts of the environmental movement on the role of
local chief administrators were:  "more sophistication in the planning
process;" "more patience;" "more  information;" "increased coordination
skills;" "technologist will threaten generalist manager."

It is clear that local officials anticipate the changes resulting from
the environmental movement (although they may not personally agree
with it).  But how have local officials responded to the needed changes?
What are their unsatisfied needs?
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Although local governments occupy a key position in environmental
management, little organized data exists on environmental activities
at that level.  Information that does exist is usually related to a
limited geographical area (one city or county) or is of a technical
nature (e.g., solid waste routing techniques).  This information gap
is a handicap to federal, state and local governments in developing
environmental policies and programs.  For local governments, it means
that they may remain unaware of potentially useful  programs, or that
they may expend valuable staff time in developing procedures that have
already been painstakingly refined by another agency.  Or, federal or
state governments may develop programs to encourage or discourage a
local activity without knowing what the impact of any new prog rams would
be on local resources.  This is especially important in an area such as
the environment where changes are occurring so rapidly.  Anticipating the
development of additional environmental policies and programs at all levels
of government, an informed understanding of local environmental management
is essential for preventing duplication and assuring coordinated efforts.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE

The purpose of this study is to provide a broad overview of environmental
management at the local level.  This overview comprises a national
"Discussions held at the Environmental Management Workshop, Annual
 Conference, International City Management Association, Minneapolis,
 September, 1972.
                                17

-------
perspective on the environmental policies, programs, problems, and needs
of local governments.  It does not attempt to evaluate or assess the
success of particular programs in detail.  With virtually no organized
data on local environmental  management, highest priority was placed on
developing an overview.  With this broad perspective in hand, research
on individual programs and problems would then be more meaningful.

The focus of the study was the local chief administrative official —
city manager, city administrator, chief administrative officer, mayor,
county executive, etc.—and on the strategic role that this official
plays in local environmental management.  The position provides access to
both the policy and administrative processes, and holds primary responsi-
bility for devising management strategies for dealing with the environment,
OVERVIEW OF THE METHODOLOGY

The research was divided into three major tasks:  (l) a conference
discussion of environmental management; (2)  a survey of local  governments;
and (3) field studies in four local governments.  The conference discussion
was conducted at a one-day workshop on environmental management as part
of the Annual Conference of the International City Management  Association.
It was held  in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in September, 1972.  The purpose of
the workshop was to  identify key issues of environmental management and
obtain guidance for  the remainder of the study.  The workshop agenda
featured a role-playing exercise and discussions of various environmental
problems, local environmental programs, and  intergovernmental  relations.
The conference discussions were instrumental in establishing the framework
for both the survey and the field studies.

The major areas selected for study were:

        .attitude of local officials toward the environment, its
         meaning and priority
        .environmental policy development
        .organizational structure for handling environmental problems,
         including  internal organization, organizing for citizen involve-
         ment, and  intergovernmental relations
        .environmental strategies or tools,  including environmental impact
         assessment, comprehensive planning and land use controls, local
         regulations and controls for air, water, noise, etc., moratoria,
         legal actions, financial  incentives and penalty structures,
         environmental quality standards

The survey consisted of an eight-page questionnaire which was mailed
to the chief executive officers in all cities over  10,000 population and
counties over 50,000 population.  The survey was designed to provide a
broad  national perspective of environmental management  in local government,
covering the areas  listed above.  Complementary surveys were sent to
selected federal officials and to the fifty  states.  A detailed description
of the survey methodology can be found at the beginning of the following
section.
                                18

-------
In order to add depth to the broad perspective of the survey, a series
of field studies was conducted in four localities of various sizes and
geographic settings.  These studies were not meant to be comprehensive
studies of environmental activities in the four areas.  Rather, they
were aimed at providing an operational example of some of the strategies
identified in the survey.  The following areas were visited:  Dallas,
Texas; Inglewood, California; Miamisburg, Ohio; and the Piedmont-Triad
area, North Carolina.  Other program information from local  governments
was received with survey responses and is injected where possible.
For additional discussion of the field study methodology, see the beginning
of Section 2.

A project advisory committee consisting of four local administrators
was formed to provide a practical and experienced perspective during the
study.  The committee was composed of Douglas Ayres, City Administrator
of Inglewood, California; Richard Gray, City Manager of Norman, Oklahoma;
Bert Johnson, County Manager of Arlington County, Virginia;  and John Laney,
City Manager of Miamisburg, Ohio.  These officials participated in the
study throughout its duration.
ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT

This report is organized around the major research elements.   Following
this introduction, the survey of local environmental management is
discussed.  Relevant state and federal data are inserted when  appropriate.
The second section examines the four field studies.  Using a  format
parallel to the first section, this section integrates the field studies
into a single discussion.  The tables of survey data and case studies
written for each field study can be found in the Appendices of the
respective sections.

-------
 B.   Survey  of  Local  Environmental  Management

 Introduction

Among the purposes of the Environmental Management project were to
find out local officials' general perceptions of the environment;
the actions or strategies local governments have adopted to manage
the environment, their problems, and needs for the future; as well
as their general evaluation of the alternative environmental manage-
ment strategies that are available.  To collect this information,
an 8-page questionnaire with thirty-six main questions and a number
of sub-parts (enough to fill 259 columns on the standard  IBM card)
was developed.  (See Appendix _^ for the text of this questionnaire.)

After pre-testing the questionnaire on the fifty-member Research
Advisory Board of ICMA, it was sent to the chief executives of the
2,272 cities over 10,000 population and the 639 counties over 50,000
population.  Although the survey instruments sent to the cities and
counties were  identical, the response rates varied; the data from
both are reported separately.  Because of time and financial constraints,
only two mailings of the questionnaire were made, the first in
February 1973» and the second in April 1973.  However, the re-
sponse rate for this questionnaire, despite the reduced mailings and
earlier deadline, is typical of other surveys conducted by ICMA.
Almost half C*9%) or 1115 of the cities responded, comparing favorably
to the response rates for studies using the same size range of
cities reported in the 1973 Municipal Yearbook.

The patterns for the response rates for this survey are also typical
of other ICMA  studies.  Larger cities are more likely to respond
than smaller ones, Western cities more than the other sections of the
country, central cities more than suburbs or independent cities,
counci1-manager cities more than mayor-council ones.  The same pattern
occurs  for the counties.   Table  1 shows the response rates
for cities. ^Despite the somewhat uneven distribution of responses,
the fact that  environment is rated as only the fourth most critical
 issue and that a number of the strategies are used by only a small
minority of the cities or counties suggests that the results are not
biased in favor of environmentally concerned or active cities.
Table 2 presents the response rate for counties.  Since the response
 rate for counties is considerably  less—only 177 or 28% responding—
the main emphasis of this report is on analyses of city data.  County
data in this report are usually  reported in terms of agreement or
disagreement with the city data.
 *A11  Tables  can be found in Appendix 2.
                                20

-------
In addition to learning about local governments' perceptions
and activities, one purpose of the project is to analyze the dif-
ferences between the perceptions of local officials and those involved
in environmental management at the state and federal levels.  In order
to discover the perceptions of these other officials, the basic
questionnaire was revised and sent to the Governor of each state and
to **9    federal officials.  (See Appendix _?	)  The
response rates for these questionnaires are small and unrepresentative
(e.g., only nineteen states responded, and only two of these are among
the ten largest states in the nation; only thirty-six federal official
responses were received).  But the perceptions of these state and
federal officials may be indicative of patterns at these governmental
levels and their responses are noted whenever relevant.

Besides the samples not being perfect replicas of the popula-
tions, several other limitations should be noted.  Although the
questionnaires were sent to the chief executive of the cities, counties,
and states, this official may have delegated the responsibility to
others in his office or in a relevant department.  Similarly, the
federal official may also have delegated it to a member of his staff.
Therefore, data on perceptions — such as evaluations of environmental
management strategies — reflect the views of the particular respondent
rather than his governmental entity; different officials in the same
jurisdiction might have different views.  In addition, there is evidence
that some respondents may have misinterpreted certain questions.

The report utilizes ICMA's standard definitions of region and
metropolitan status.  Four regions are used, reflecting those used by
the Bureau of the Census.  Unfortunately, these do not conform to the
ten regions used by EPA.  The Northeast is composed of New England
states (Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island,
and Connecticut) and the Middle Atlantic states  (New York, Pennsylvania,
and New Jersey); the North Central is composed of:  Ohio, Indiana,
Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota,
South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas; the South includes the states of
the South Atlantic (Delaware, Maryland, West Virginia, District of
Columbia, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida)
the East South Central (Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Alabama),
and the West South Central (Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas, and Louisiana);
the West is composed of the Mountain states (Montana, Idaho, Wyoming,
Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Arizona, and New Mexico), and the Pacific states
(Washington, Oregon, California, Alaska, and Hawaii).

City types also are derived from basic Bureau of the Census  defi-
nitions; central cities are the central cities of an SMSA (Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area); suburbs are all other cities in an SMSA,
and independent cities are all cities outside of an SMSA.
                               21

-------
This part first examines the perceptions of environment as a policy
issue.  It then looks at several organizational elements for managing
the environment.  Following this, the utilization of alternative
action strategies to manage the environment is examined and finally
the evaluations of these alternatives are analyzed.  A subsequent
section looks at the factors perceived as contributing to the develop-
ment of environmental management programs.  Next, the survey responses
concerning intergovernmental relations are analyzed.  The penultimate
section reports on the problems of the local governments and their
chief executives in managing the environment.   The last chapter sum-
marizes the survey data and makes several observations about them.
                               22

-------
C.  Environment as a Policy Issue
Introduct ion

The perceptions of the environment as a policy issue are important for
several reasons.  First, these Verceptions shape any action undertaken.
A local government's policy, in part, depends on whether it perceives
a problem as serious or merely of minor concern, and whether it perceives
a problem in its narrowest dimensions or as one facet of a complex
constellation of issues.  Second, the degree of consensus of perceptions
is one factor influencing the ability of units of government to work
together.  If there Is consensus, then the likelihood of cooperation
between governments at the same level (and governments at different
levels) is greater.  If there is little consensus at one level  (or be-
tween levels), then the likelihood of misunderstanding or conflict
increases.

This section of the paper examines four aspects of the environment as a
policy issue.  First, it focuses upon how the three levels of government,
as represented in our samples, define the scope of the environmental
issue.  Second, it examines the local governments' perceptions  of the
severity of various aspects of the environmental problem--e.g., the
severity of the problem of solid waste or air pollution.  Third, it
analyzes the ranking of the environmental issue compared to other issues,
as perceived by the respondents from each of the three levels of govern-
ment.  Finally, this section looks at the development of a statement of
environmental goals or policies as another indicator of the perception
of the environment as an issue.  These statements may merely be official
general expressions on this policy issue, or, more importantly, they may
serve as the foundation for a program of action.
DEFINITION OF ENVIRONMENT

Our questionnaire assumes great variation among local  governmental
officials' perceptions of the term "environment," and  our survey results
confirm the lack of consensus.  Four alternative definitions of "environ-
ment" were posed, each increasing in the breadth of its coverage.   The
first choice restricts the definition to the "natural  environment"  or
the pollution media:  "air, noise, sewerage, solid waste, toxic sub-
stances, water."  The second alternate definition broadens it slightly
to include "energy, historical preservation, land use  and open space,
radiation, population, and wildlife preservation," as  well as those as-
pects listed in the first definition.  The third alternative adopts all
the previously mentioned factors and adds more factors, largely reflec-
ting elements of the "physical environment" including  "aesthetics,
                               23

-------
health, housing, mass transportation, recreation, streets and highways."
The last alternative is the broadest, almost reflecting a general
"quality of life" scope; it includes all of the factors mentioned
earlier, plus:  "economic development, education, employment, public
safety, and welfare."

None of the four alternative definitions receives support from more than
approximately one third of the respondents (see Table 3)-  The narrowest
definition is accepted by M%, the next broadest by 26%, the next by 23%,
and the broadest definition by 3k%.  This lack of consensus may be a
source of conflict as the actors in the decision making process do not
share a common perspective.

It is significant, however, that the cities are more likely to view
environment in its broader dimensions--more than half (57%) select one
of the two broader definitions, and less than a fifth (17?) restrict
their definitions to the natural environment only.  This suggests that
proposals to manage the environment through regulation of elements which
contribute indirectly to pollution (e.g., regulating land use in order
to affect transportation patterns thereby reducing air pollution) would
not be rejected on the grounds of having only remote relevance to
environment; many city officials already view land use and transportation
as part of "environment."

Some types of cities are more likely to view the environment broadly than
other cities.  Cities in the West are most likely to interpret environ-
ment broadly, while those in the Northeast define the term most narrowly.
Central cities define it somewhat more broadly than suburbs or indepen-
dent cities.  This may generally reflect their broader responsibilities
and more diverse programs, or it may actually reflect the specific
content of each proposed definition (e.g., mass transportation is included
as part of the third definition, and the largest cities—over 250,000
population—are most likely to select this definition).  But there is no
consistent relationship between the size of the city and how its officials
define environment.  Cities with a counci1-manager form of government
view it slightly more broadly than those with the mayor-council form.
This may stem from the managers' greater administrative responsibilities
which make them a focal point for decisions on a wide range of issues,
thereby reinforcing their view of environment as a complex and inter-
related set of  issues.

The same basic pattern occurs in the counties' responses, which also
show little consensus.  No one definition  is  cited by more than 38%
of those surveyed.  The respondents most likely  to use the broad defini-
tion are Western  counties,  metropolitan counties,  and  counties with  an
administrator (see Table k) .

Our samples of state and federal respondents  indicate the same pattern
of little consensus among themselves and a preference for a broad

-------
definition of environment.  Of the nineteen states responding, only one
defines environment in the narrowest terms; almost three-fourths (lk%)
divide equally between the two broadest definitions.  Similarly, only
8% of the federal respondents see environment in its narrowest dimension,
while kk% choose the broadest definition, and another one-third choose
the next broadest.  The broad perspective of the federal respondents
is surprising since the legislative mandates of most of the agencies
are specialized rather than general.

Although there are differences among the officials responding to this
question, a majority of each group indicates a preference for a broad
definition of environment as a policy issue.  The different levels of
government, therefore, show a greater similarity of perspective than
might have been expected given their varying mandates and constituencies.
SEVERITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS

The cities were asked to rate the severity of nine environmental
problems in their community on a 5~point scale from no problem  (1)
to severe problem (5).  The nine problems in the order of the mean
severity scores are:

                PROBLEM            MEAN

                1  land use        (3.3)
                (2) growth          (3-2)
                (2) solid waste     (3.2)
                (2) wastewater      (3-2)
                5  aesthetics      (2.8)
                (6) noise           (2.A)
                (6) water supply    (2.4)
                8  air             (2.3)
                9  radiation       (1.2)

The problem of  land use--although not specifically defined in the ques-
tionnaire or by the respondents--is ranked as the most severe problem by
all size categories, by all regions except the Northeast, by metropolitan
cities, and by council-manager cities.  The only other problems ranked
as most severe by any category of cities are solid waste and growth  (see
Table 5)-

The solid waste problem shows the greatest variations in scores across
any categorization of cities—the average rating in the West for that
problem is 2.7 compared to an average of 3-6 for the Northeast.  In  the
West solid waste is ranked sixth in importance as compared to the North-
east which on the average ranks it as the most serious problem.  In  this
case, the severity of the problem may be more a function of available
land for land-fill than of the size of the city, in view of the fact
                               25

-------
that the average severity score assigned to the problem does not vary
with the population classification of the cities.

Air pollution is the only problem that varies directly with population;
the larger the city the higher the average severity score for the prob-
lem.  This is to be anticipated because of the concentration of sources
of air pol lution—automobi les and industries—in population centers.

Although none of the other environmental problems varies with population
size, a composite score of the average severity scores does indicate
that the larger cities face (or perceive that they face) more severe
environmental problems.  The average severity scores for the three
largest city-size groups are 2.78, 2.70, and 2.72 respectively, while
for the next three groups they are 2.67, 2.67 and 2.63-  Other differ-
ences in the composite average severity score indicate that council-
manager cities rate their environmental problems more severely than
mayor-council cities (2.69 and 2.58 respectively), and metropolitan
areas more severely than independent cities (2.68 for central cities,
2.67 for suburbs, and 2.61 for independent cities).

The results for the responding counties are basically similar but show
some variations from the city response.  The ordering and average
severity scores for the counties are:

                PROBLEM            MEAN

                1  solid waste     (3.7)
                2  land use        (3.6)
                3  wastewater      (3.5)
                4  growth          (3-3)
                5  water supply    (2.8)
                6  aesthetics      (2.7)
                7  air             (2.5)
                8  noise           (2.3)
                9  radiation       (1.2)

The greatest differences are the higher severity scores for solid waste
and water-supply problems for the counties.

For the counties, both air and noise pollution vary directly with city
size.  There is a slight tendency for the  larger counties to rate the
severity of their problems higher.  Metropolitan counties also rate
their problems as more severe (see Table 6).

Although  it  is assumed that rankings of severity reflect the nature of
the problem  in the community, they may also reflect the extent of authority
and expertise available to determine the nature of problems.  Land use
is controlled by the local governments and they report they have exper-
tise in that area.  Similarly, the counties' rating of air pollution as
                               26

-------
more severe and noise as less severe than cities may reflect the locus
of control for these forms of pollution rather than the extent of the
p rob 1 ems.
COMPARATIVE RANK OF ENVIRONMENT ISSUE

The environment as an issue has increased in importance in recent years
at the national and state levels as well as in many local  communities.
Nevertheless, most cities responding to the survey do not consider it one
of their most important local issues.  Only about one-third of the
respondents rate the issue as the most important or second most important
issue facing their cities (see Table 7).  Cities generally rate taxes,
housing and urban blight, and education as more important issues;
environment ranks fourth overall (see Table 8).

Environment is of greatest concern in the West—which is the only
region where cities rank it as the most important issue.  Almost half
(kk%) of the responding cities in the West rank it first or second in
importance, while only 11% rank it sixth through eighth.  Responses to
other questions also indicate the Western cities are more likely to
perceive various environmental problems (e.g., air pollution) as more
serious than the other regions; it appears that their concern may be
more recent than some of the other regions as they have initiated
certain strategies and organizational forms more recently.  The larger
cities are less likely to rate environment as one of the two most im-
portant issues and more likely to rank it at the bottom of the list.

There is a contrast in the ranking of environment and other issues
depending upon the metropolitan status of the cities.  Suburbs rank the
issue higher than do the central cities (cities independent of a metro-
politan area rank it between the other two city-types).  The suburbs
give the environment issue their third highest mean ranking at 2.8,
compared to independent cities giving their fourth highest mean at 2.9,
and the central cities placing it fifth among the issues with a mean
rating of 3.2.  Although the environment issue affects us all — those
living in the inner city as well as suburbia—the press of other issues
in the central cities places environment lower in the hierarchy of
issues.

The consistently high rankings given  taxes as a local issue suggests
that environmental programs may have difficutly gaining approval when
their costs become known, or that financial support for local environ-
mental programs must come from state or federal sources.  On the other
hand, judging from local environmental bond elections, [and from the
public opinion survey noted earlier ] the public seems to accept
greater expenditures for environmental purposes at this time.

It should be noted that many cities (20%) took the opportunity afforded
them by the questionnaire to add their own issues to our list of seven
                               27

-------
issues.  Among the problems specified as important are liquid and
solid waste disposal and others directly related to environmental
problems, such as land use.  If these responses had been receded
as "environment," that issue would probably have ranked higher.

In contrast to the local  governments which often have other priorities,
the state and federal respondents rate the environment as the most
important issue with mean ratings of 2.2 and 3.1 respectively.  With
regard to taxes, state respondents place it as the third most important
issue  (with a mean rating of 3-0), while the federal  administrators rate
it as  tied for least important of the seven issues (with a mean rating
of 5-0).

This comparison of rankings of various issues suggests that if these
patterns are truly reflective of the views of all city and state
chief executives and federal agencies involved in the environment area,
then the potential for conflict is great.  Local governments may be
reluctant to undertake expensive environmental management programs,
while  state and federal officials may not understand this reluctance
given  their relative perception of the issues.
STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS OR POLICY

The adoption of a statement of general environmental goals or policy
may be no more than an official expression of the environment as a policy
issue, or it may be the first  logical step in the development of a
plan for managing the environment.  Regardless of its intent or use,
and regardless of the issue, explicit statements of goals are not
typical for local governments.  Adoption of a statement of general
environmental policy principles or goals is no exception.  Relatively
few cities, only one-fifth, indicate they have adopted a statement.  But
a larger numbei—approximately 23% — report that it  is under consideration
by city officials (see Table 9)•

Goals or policy statements are more likely to have been adopted by the
larger cities--32% of the cities over 100,000 compared to 19% of the
other cities.  Central cities, regardless of their size, are also more
likely to have adopted them.  Western cities show the highest use  (37%)>
although they are more recent converts than other cities--63% of them
adopted environmental goals or policy statements in 1972 or 1973, compared
to 31% for the other regions.  In fact, 45% of all cities adopted them in
1972 or 1973.  The recent use of this action is also illustrated by
the fact that only 20% of the  cities which adopted statements did so
prior to 1970.  Larger cities, central cities, and mayor-council cities
were more likely to be early adopters than smaller, suburban or independent,
and counci1-manager cities  (see Table 10).

The counties responding to our survey report a slightly higher use (27%)
and contemplation (2k%) of statements of environmental policy or goals
than was shown by cities.  Their responses also indicate recent adoption
                                28

-------
(37% since 1972 and only 2k% prior to 1970).  Again, in the West, counties
indicate the most frequent use and also the most recent adoption.  No
counties indicate adoption of such statements prior to 1970.  Metro-
politan counties were earlier and more frequent users than non-metro-
politan counties (see Tables 11 and 12).
SUMMARY

When representatives of local and state governments and federal agencies
are asked which of four definitions of environment they prefer, there
is little consensus.  No definition is endorsed by a majority of any set
of officials.  But the two broader definitions are more likely to be
endorsed than the two narrower ones.  State and federal respondents are
especially likely to choose the broader definitions.

The two environment problems seen as most serious by the cities and
counties are land use and solid waste, although not all parts of the
country or types of local governments necessarily rate only these prob-
lems as the two most serious ones.  Local officials' recognition of land
use problems as serious suggests that its contribution to environmental
conditions and the role of land use regulations in safeguarding or
managing the environment are also recognized.

Local governments see environment as only one of a number of serious
local problems, usually ranking it as less important than other issues,
especially taxes.  But the state and federal  respondents see environment
as the most important issue and rank taxes lower (the federal officials'
rank taxes seventh in priority).  This suggests the possibility of
conflict within local government between competing programs for the
financial resources which are perceived of as scarce, and conflict
between the local governments and other levels of government which do
not share this perception of taxes as a critical issue and which see
environment as the most important issue.

Few municipal ities--only about one-fifth of the cities and 27% of the
counties--have translated their perceptions of the environment as a
policy issue, into an explicit statement of environmental goals or policy.
However, many more local governments report they have it under consideration.
                                29

-------
D.  Organizational Aspects of Environmental Management
Introduction

Environmental management is not a new enterprise for local  govern-
ment, even though new attention is being given to it.  One conse-
quence of this ongoing activity is that a local government is likely
to already have some existing organizational structure when an
environmental management strategy involving programs of action is
developed.  What is frequently needed organizationally is a Way
to coordinate new and old programs.   One focus of this section is
to examine local governments' use of three alternate means of
coordination — specifically, the creation of an environmental
department, the use of a staff committee, and the use of an official
designated as primarily responsible for environmental matters.

Another element of organizational structure that is receiving
more attention in the 1970's than ever before, although it too has
been an ongoing feature of local government decision making, con-
cerns citizen participation.  One means of facilitating citizen
participation that involves an organizational unit is the use of
citizen boards and/or commissions.  The use of such boards and
commissions is the second organizational aspect of environmental
management examined in this section.
ORGANIZATION

Environmental management is marked by a fragmentation of responsibility.
Even within a single jurisdiction, many agencies may be involved,
yet each may have responsibility for only a portion of the environ-
ment (e.g., collection and disposal of solid waste, or treatment of
liquid waste).  The need for coordination, therefore, is great.  A
number of methods is  available.  Some local governments have created
a single environment department which encompasses all or most of the
functions previously carried out by many departments.  Others may
have created an environment department as an additional  department
or agency without major re-organization of existing departments.  A
third alternative is to expand the functions of an existing depart-
ment so that  it functions as an environment department.   A different
method of coordination is to have a staff committee which meets
regularly with the specific task of considering environment matters.
This committee may cover the entire range of environmental management
problems, or  it may have a more limited scope such as review of
environmental impact statements.  An alternative method of coordi-
nation is to focus responsibility for environmental management by
                            30

-------
designating a single official as having primary responsibility
for environmental matters; this person may already be serving as
the chief executive, be on the chief executive's immediate staff, or be
the head of a department with some environmental responsibility.
These alternatives are not necessarily mutually exclusive.  It is
possible for a city to indicate it has an environmental department
and to designate its head as having primary responsibility, or
for a city to have a staff committee playing a coordinating role
but to designate its chief executive as having primary responsibility
for environment matters.

The data on the cities' responses indicate a remarkably similar
organizational pattern.  Larger cities are more likely than smaller
cities to have adopted each of the organizational  alternatives,
(e.g., almost half — *»9% — of the cities over 100,000 report they
have an environmental department or agency, compared to 21% of the
smaller cities).  This may reflect a greater need for coordination
in larger cities, or a greater organizational  sophistication (see
Tables 13, I1* and 15).

Similarly the West is more likely to use each alternative than the
other regions (with the South showing the lowest proportion of
adoptions).  For example, 31% of Western cities use a staff committee
compared to 17% of the other cities.  This differential between
Western and other cities is the greatest for this alternative, and
it may reflect the committee's utility in the environmental impact
statement process that is required by California state law for
public and private projects.   But, in general, the larger accep-
tance of these organizational structures in the West may stem from their
greater concern with the environment noted earlier in the discussion
on the ranking of the environmental  issue.

Metropolitan cities are more likely to use each of these alternatives
than independent cities.  For example, 3**% of the central cities,
25% of the suburbs, and only lA% of the independent cities indicate
the existence of an environmental  department or agency.

The fourth classification of cities  used throughout this study --
the form of government, primarily mayor-council cities compared to
counci1-manager cities — also shows  a consistent pattern.  The
mayor-council cities are slightly more likely than the counci1-manager
cities to use each of the alternatives (the proportions are 2k% and
18% for staff committies, 26% and 22% for environmental department,
and 43% and 40% for a designated official  respectively).   This may
be a function of the other factors noted above, such as geographic
variations, rather than of the governmental form itself.
                            31

-------
Environmental Department

Environmental departments or agencies are  reported by 23% of
the cities.  The primary functions ascribed to them cover a wide
range of activities, and vary somewhat depending on whether
the environmental agency is a separate department or part of an-
other department.  For instance only 26% of the cities with a
separate department reports that one of its primary functions is
interdepartmental coordination, compared to $6% of the cities
whose environmental agency is part of another department.  One
explanation for this may be that once a separate department is
created, environmental activities are reorganized so that it
exercises the authority previously held by several departments,
thereby eliminating the need for interdepartmental coordination.
But, an examination of the functions assigned to the departments
suggests this is not the case.   Comparing the functions performed
by separate environmental departments and by environmental
agencies which are part of other departments indicates that
separate departments are more likely than the other type to per-
form research (51% to kQ%, respectively), to be responsible for
program development (6]% to 56%), and to have advisory functions
(lk% to 6]%).  They are less likely to be involved in planning
(59% to 66%), inspection (61% to 6k%), enforcement (k]% to 65%),
environmental impact assessment (hk% to 60%), and interdepartmental
coordination.  Based on this data separate environment departments
do not appear to be exercising the same role as environmental
agencies within existing departments.  Most separate agencies are
not performing a complete range of functions that might be
expected of them (see Tables 16 and 17)-

The data also indicate that the existence of an environmental
department or agency is a recent development.  Sixty percent (60$)
of the environmental departments have been created since the
decade of the 1970's began.  This tendency is strongest  in the West
(73%), and weakest among the central cities (32%) and the
largest cities (37% of the cities over 250,000; see Table 18).
Staff Committee

The use of a staff committee which meets regularly to consider
environmental matters specifically was reported by 20% of the
cities.  As noted earlier, it occurs most frequently in larger
cities (32%), in metropolitan areas (2k%),  in the West (31%)
and in the mayor-council form of government (2k% • see Table 14)
Designated Official

A larger proportion of the cities report they have designated
an official as having primary responsibility for environmental
matters (kQ% of the cities, compared to 20% and 22% of the cities
                           32

-------
reporting the use of an environmental department and staff
committee respectively).  In one fourth of the cases, it is
the chief executive (either the mayor or the city manager)
who has been designated.  This is most likely to occur in the
smaller cities—e.g., in 40% of the cities between 10,000 and
25,000, but only 14% of the cities between 25,000 and 50,000, and
9% in cities between 50,000 and 250,000, and not at all  in cities
above that size (see Table 15).  The chief executive in  smaller
cities often must play a larger role because of his limited staff,
but it is also true that the smaller scope and scale enable the
chief executives to do this (see Table 19).

An additional 9% of the cities utilize a staff member within the
chief executive's office.  Twelve percent  (12%) of the cities
report using the head of their environmental department  or
agency.  This is more likely in the larger cities where  the
proportion of environmental department heads in cities over
500,000 who are the designated official is 50% (3 of 6).  But,
this proportion declines at virtually each size category until only
9% (or 8) of the 92 heads of environmental departments or agencies
in cities between 10,000 and 25,000 are the designated official.

Approximately one third of the cities reporting a designated official
use a non-environmental department head.  Some examples  of the de-
partment heads being used are:  Planning, Health, Public Works, City
Engineer, Community Development, Parks and Recreation, and Sanitation,
Also, 12% use the environmental department head.

An additional 10% list other officials such as a particular
staff position within a relevant department, for example a designated
member of the Planning Department staff, and several reply that a
city councilman was the designated official.  An additional 10% do
not specify the official who is designated (see Table 19).

The functions assigned to this official include both line functions
such as carrying out operational responsibilities for environmental
programs (51%) and supervising environmental activities  (55%), and
staff functions such as developing environmental programs (49%)
and providing advice (68%).  The functions assigned vary according
to the designated official.  The head of the environmental  department
is more likely to be responsible for each of these functions than
are other departmental heads, a staff member in the chief executive's
office, or even the chief executive himself.  No clear relationship
between the form of government and the type of functions emerges
(see Table 20).

The data for the counties show some similarities and some differ-
ences.  The three alternatives--an environmental department or
                               33

-------
agency, a staff committee, and a designated official  -- are
used by 55%, ^2%, and k8% respectively, according to the counties
responding to our survey.  In each case, these proportions are
higher than for cities.  The relationship between size and use
noted for cities is not as clear, but the largest counties (over
£00,000) report more use of these alternatives than the smaller
counties, aid the smallest group polled (50,000 - 100,000)  reports
the least use.  The West is still the most frequent user of the
staff committee and designated official; the West trails the
Northeast by one percentage point in the use of the environmental
department.  The difference for metropolitan status is not as clear.
Counties with professional administrators are more likely to use each
of these methods, in contrast to the cities where the mayor-council
cities are more likely to use them  (see Tables 21, 22, and 23).
Each of the functions of the environment department noted in the
questionnaire is used proportionately more frequently by the counties
than by the cities (see Table 2^).  This is also true for the
functions assigned the designated officer (see Tables 25 and 26).
CITIZEN BOARDS                                 ""

Environmental legislation of the 1970's has included a strong role for
citizen participation in the governmental process.  For example,
procedures for citizen participation play a key role in both the
federal environmental impact statement process, as well as the
implementation of the 1972 Water Pollution Control Act Amendments.
Local environmental legislation has also been influenced by the
precedent set in similar federal legislation.  In part this reflects
the attitudinal change that has occurred in the last decade relative
to participation and responsiveness.  But in part it reflects the
nature of the environmental issue which is perceived as affecting
the entire citizenry and not just a particular economic, racial, or
regional group.  The increased role for citizen participation is also
a recognition of the strength and political influence of organized
environmental interest groups.

Citizen participation may take place through a variety of means such
as public hearings, or laws facilitating citizen-initiated suits.
Another means of citizen participation is through citizen boards
or commissions.  These groups may play a variety of manifest and
latent functions, which can range from actual decision making (such
as the role of many planning commissions and zoning boards) to
only an advisory role.

Since emphasis on the environment in local decision making is a
relatively recent phenomenon, the survey focuses on whether cities
are creating new citizen boards or commissions to deal with environ-
mental issues or whether they are expanding the.scope of already
existing boards.  These alternatives are not exclusive, of course,
and it is possible for a city to do bo,th (or neither).

-------
The survey of cities indicates that more cities are likely to
expand existing boards (51%) than to create new ones (24%) (see
Tables 27 and 28).  Boards most likely to have their functions
expanded to include environmental matters are planning commissions,
as was reported by more than three-fourths of the cities  (79%)
(see Table 29).  Many cities feel that the agencies involved in
planning should include environmental considerations in their
work.  Although this approach may not operate as well  in
developed cities where land use may be changing slowly, there
does not appear to be any relationship between city size and
the expansion of planning commissions.  This expansion tends
to occur more frequently in the West, which has more open space
and a recent history of rapid growth.

Only 30% of the cities who mentioned expanding any board use
community development boards.  In some communities these boards may
be concerned with economic development, in which case there may be
considerable conflict between growth or expansion oriented
objectives and environmental protection or enhancement objectives.
It is interesting to note that the Western cities, which are
most concerned with the environment, are the least likely to
expand community development commissions (only 16% compared to
35% for the other regions); the South is most likely to do it (40%) .

Another board frequently expanded is the park and recreation
commission; 48% of those expanding citizen board functions used
them.  Although environmental management extends beyond planning
of parks and the beautification mission, many cities feel they
blend well with a general concern for the environment.

Other boards are also utilized.  For example, 18% of the cities
expanded the function of groups concerned with historic preservation.
A number of other boards are mentioned, including conservation
commissions, beaut ification boards, health advisory committees,
and urban renewal and housing commissions.  General advisory
committees also frequently take on the additional area of the
envi ronment.

When new citizen boards are created, they are given a wide range of
functions.  Yet in only 14% of the cities were they given any
enforcement functions.   More frequently their functions include org-
anizing community programs (42%), environmental education (56%),
investigation of environmental problems (72%), and, of course,
advising the decision makers (87%) (see Table 30).  Some  (21%) of the
new boards are specialized--i.e., concerned with a specific
environmental problem.   Air pollution is the most frequent;
                               35

-------
61% of the specialized new citizen boards deal  with air pollution
(see Table 31).  Specialized boards are more likely to be found
in larger cities than smaller ones; kj% of the  cities over 100,000
who have new citizen boards compared to \1% of  the cities between
10,000 and 100,000 (see Table 32).

The survey data indicate that the median size for these new citizen
environmental commissions is seven, but the range extends from two
to 250 (with a mean of eleven).  The size of the board does not
vary directly with the size of the city.  The  survey does not
examine how these boards are appointed.  But based on information
furnished us, we know that the range of styles  is great.  Some
communities attempt  to make  the  board  representative of  the citizenry,
while others try to ensure that all major local interests will
have representation.  Some cities use the same  procedures for
citizen environmental boards as they do for other citizen boards,
while some cities have suspended residence or other requirements.
Some cities require certain relevant scientific skills to be
included, while others rely upon the citizens'  interest  in
environmental matters.

Regarding county efforts, 5'% expanded existing committees,
while 36% created new boards (compared to 2k% for cities).  The
data for the counties, like that of the cities, indicate that
the South is least likely of the four regions to create new
citizen boards and that the West  is most likely to expand previous
ones.  Unlike the city data which  indicate that counci1-manager
cities are less likely to expand or create citizens boards, the
county data indicate that counties with an administrator (compared
to those without an administrator) are more likely to create
new boards, but less likely to expand old ones  (see Tables 33
and 3*0.

Counties, too, are likely to expand the functions of planning
commissions -- 85% of the counties acknowledged expanding existing
board functions (see Table 35).  They are more  likely than cities
to create specialized boards;  in fact, k$% of the new boards are
listed as specialized.  Air pollution again is  the most  likely
area (60% of the new specialized boards), with  solid waste
the second most likely (S^%)•  More county citizen boards are
involved in enforcement than city boards; 27% compared to
approximately half that -- or  14% — for cities.  This reflects
their greater responsibility for  regional enforcement of air and
water quality standards and,subsequently, their greater  use of
specialized boards.  County boards are less involved than the city
boards  in the other functions  (see Tables 36, 37 and 38).  Boards
are slightly larger, with a mean of 19, with no apparent relation
to the size of the county.
                           36

-------
SUMMARY

This section has examined local governments' use of several
alternative organizational forms, specifically the creation of
an environmental department, the use of a staff committee, and
the practice of designating an official as having primary
responsibility for environmental matters.  In addition, the use
of citizen advisory boards was analyzed.

The responses from the cities indicate that the use of a
designated official is most frequent (kO%) , and an environmental
department or staff committee is used by only 23% and 20% of the
cities respectively.  Each alternative is more likely to be used
by larger cities than small ones, by Western cities than those  in other
regions, by metropolitan cities than independent cities, and by
mayor-council cities than counci1-manager cities.  These alter-
native organizations are assigned a variety of functions.

Approximately half of the cities report they have expanded the func-
tions of existing citizen advisory boards to include environmental
matters.  The unit most likely to have its scope expanded is the
planning commission, although a variety of boards are being
utilized by localities.  Approximately one fourth of the cities
have created new citizen environmental commissions; the latter
have been encouraged in several states — e.g. New Jersey, where
environmental commissions are eligible for certain state funds.
Citizen advisory boards perform a wide range of functions,
although only \k% have   enforcement functions.  Approximately
one fifth of the new boards are specialized, more frequently
concerned with air pollution than any other environmental problem.
                           37

-------
E.  Utilization of Environmental Management Strategies


Introduction

One of the prime purposes of the survey was to learn what actions
or strategies local governments have adopted to manage the environ-
ment and to find out how they evaluate these alternative program
elements.  These two aspects are examined through a series of closed-
ended questions about the the use and evaluation of the programs
and an open-ended question asking for the "most important or innova-
tive actions or programs" the local government has undertaken in the
last two years to improve or safeguard the environment.  Data on the
utilization of various techniques are analyzed in this section, while
the data on the evaluations of the strategies are discussed in the
following section.

The actions examined by the questionnaire and reported in this section
include nine examples of land use controls, such as flood plain
zoning, and another nine examples of additional controls potentially
useful in promoting or safeguarding the environment, such as housing
codes.  In addition the local governments were asked to indicate
whether or not they have:

      —adopted a conservation or environmental section in their
        master plan,

      —officially adopted, monitored, or enforced environmental
        quality standards,

      —adopted a requirement for environmental impact statements,

      — imposed a moratorium based on environmental considerations,

      —used tax  incentives or effluent charges as a means to
        manage the environment,

      — initiated law suits regarding environmental matters.

Additional data from a recent ICMA study concerning the use of  inter-
governmental service agreements by local governments  is also analyzed.

The utilization of these various techniques ranged from \% of the
cities reporting  the use of an ordinance restricting  non-return
bottles, to 84% reporting ordinances concerning signs, refuse, and
abandoned vehicles.
                               38

-------
LAND USE CONTROLS

The questionnaire lists nine examples of land use controls and asks
the local governments to indicate whether or not they have been
enacted  in their community.  Of those responding to the question-
naire, enactment ranges from a low of 121 for marshland controls to
a high of 83% for "required installation of public facilities (e.g.,
sewers) by developers."  The average enactment or utilization rate
for the nine controls is 35% (see Tables 39-^0).

With the exception of some other types of controls examined (some of
which could be considered land use controls), this utilization rate
exceeds that of the other strategies.   Land use controls apparently
are a major approach for many cities in developing an environmental
management strategy.  Land use controls are also perceived by local
government as highly effective in promoting and securing environmental
quality  (see the discussion of evaluations in the next section).  !t
should also be noted that both of these findings agree with the re-
sults of the EPA-funded survey of planning agency officials done by
the Center for Urban and Regional Studies of the University of North
Carolina.'

The nine land use controls in rank order of cities reporting enact-
of them  (and county users reported in parentheses) are:

      1. Required installation of public facilities (e.g., sewers)
         by developers—83% (51%).  Western cities and central
         cities tend to have a higher proportion of adoption than
         other cities.  The North Carolina report, which indicates
         75% of their respondents have such requirements, reported
         a similar proportion of use.

      2. Open space zoning--48% (36%).  This is more frequently used
         by suburban cities than either central or independent
         cities; it is also most frequent in the West and North
         Central states and least likely to be used by the South.
         Since neither the questionnaire nor the cities elaborate
         on this tool, it is not clear whether open space zoning
         refers to publicly owned land or privately held land.

      3. Required dedication of land for public purposes (e.g.,
         schools, parks) by developers--1*7% (29%).  The utiliza-
         tion rates are similar to the use of open space zoning; greater
'"'Edward J. Kaiser, et al., Promoting Environmental Quality Through
Urban Planning ancl Controls (Chapel Hill:  Center for Urban and
Regional Studies, University of North Carolina, 1973), Ch. IV.
                               39

-------
         use by suburbs,  Western and North  Central  cities,
         least use by Southern cities.   There are a number
         of mechanisms used including dedication of land,
         actual development of a park,  and  a substitute fi-
         nancial  fee placed into a trust fund for park de-
         velopment and maintenance (some cities reported fees
         of $200-300 per  unit for such  purposes).

      k.  Flood plain zoning--45% (38%).   The North Carolina
         study indicated  a similar utilization rate--42%.
         This tool is more likely to have been adopted by
         larger cities, 56% of the cities over 100,000 re-
         porting it  compared to k5% of the cities between
         10,000 and 100,000 population,  and by the cities
         in the Northeast and North Central regions of the
         country.   A number of states are beginning to view
         flood plains as  special zones  requiring special
         treatment. "

      5.  Zoning for protection of natural resources or ecolo-
         gical systems — 35% (33%).  This device is most likely
         to be used by smaller cities and least likely to  be
         used by central  cities.  But,  it is not clear as  to
         which natural resources or ecological systems are
         being protected, whether they are  the specific object of
         the zoning, or whether their protection is a by-product
         of other zoning.

      6.  Architectural appearance--27% (11%).  This tool to
         regulate the aesthetic element of  the environment
         is most frequently used in the West (1*2%) and in
         suburban cities  (35%).  The North  Carolina study,  although it
         reports use by only 13% of their respondents, agrees
         with our findings of heavier use by non-principal
         cities in SMSAs (25%) compared to  8% by all others.
         Historical preservation-- 23% (2U%) .  This is a means of
         protecting only a small segment of the environment.
         Its use is heaviest in the larger cities (80% of the
         responding cities over 500,000 population, and 53%
         of cities over 100,000 population) which are usually
*Roger B. Hansen, "Legal Devices for Planning and Land Use Control:
A Basic Outline," a paper presented to the National Conference on
Managing the Environment, May 1^-15, 1973 (Washington, D.C.).

-------
         older cities.  The abundance of older communities  in the
         Northeast also accounts for its higher use there.  Central
         cities are twice as  likely to have such controls as sub-
         urban cities.  These findings are also confirmed by the
         survey of planning agency directors which found use by
         25% of all cities, but $6% of central cities  in SMSA's.

      8. Growth 1 imitations—23% (12%).  A "new mood" of public
         resistance to the idea that growth is both inevitable
         and  desirable and increased public support for little
         or no growth were reported recently by a federal task
         force on land use and urban growth.*  In a number of
         communities, referenda and public elections in which
         growth has been either a direct or indirect issue have
         been won by advocates of growth restrictions.  A number
         of methods to limit growth are available and are being
         utilized by local governments.  According to the data,
         suburban cities are most likely to adopt such controls
         (23%), but support for it is consistent throughout
         almost all of the classifications of cities used in
         this study.

      9. Marshland controls--12% (12%).  Use of these controls
         is  most common in the Northeast (24%, compared to 8%
         for the other regions)  and in the larger ci.ties (19%
         of cities over 100,000 compared to 11% for the smaller
         cities).  The survey of planning directors indicates
         use by 19% of them.

A number of other land use controls are cited separately by the respon-
dents.  For example, several note the use of the Planned Unit Develop-
ment concept requiring the developer to plan his project as a small
community.   Agricultural  preserves — limiting the tax rate on agricul-
tural land on the urban fringe thus keeping it off the marketplace for
developers—is noted separately by some, also.

A second question in the survey lists a potpourri  of nine additional
controls potentially useful  in promoting or safeguarding environmental
quality (see Tables 41-42).   The controls in order of their rate of
adoption by the cities (with the same data for counties noted in paren-
theses)  are:
*The Use £f Land;  A Citizens' Policy Guide _t£ Urban Growth (New
York:  Crowell, 1973).

-------
1. Sign ordinance—84% (31%).  Its high utilization rate is
   almost uniform throughout all  of the classifications of
   cities.  The survey of planning directors also indicated
   considerable use—in 72% of the local governments.

2. Sanitation (refuse) ordinance—84% (49%).  Its use is
   slightly more likely in larger cities (90% over 100,000),
   the South (93%), and the North Central area (87%), and
   slightly less likely in suburban communities (80%).
   Planning directors indicate use of "health/sanitation
   ordinances" in 78% of the communities.

3. Abandoned vehicle ordinance—84% (27%).   The enactment
   of such ordinances is more likely to be found in larger
   cities (90%).  It is least common in the Northeast,
   where only 76% of the cities report using such ordinances.

4. Housing code—80% (37%).  Only six of the eighty-nine
   cities (7%) over  100,000  that  responded to our survey do
   not indicate the use of a housing code.   Use of codes is
   most common In central cities   (96%) and least common in
   suburbs (74%); use is most likely in the South (89%).
   Planners in 73% of the agencies report its use.

5. Grading (excavation) ordinance—43% (24%).  Its use is
   most common in the West (61%)  and rarest in the South
   (26%), no doubt reflecting the topography of those areas.
   It is more likely to occur in  suburban areas (53%) and
   least likely in independent cities (27%).  The planning
   survey indicates use in 49% of the jurisdictions.

6. Noise ordinance—35% (8%).  This control is apparently
   interpreted to refer to the nuisance-type regulations
   (i.e., those banning unreasonably loud noise) rather
   than the more complex one involving actual noise emission
   standards to be monitored and enforced.  Twice as many
   cities report a noise ordinance than  indicate the exis-
   tence of local officially adopted noise standards  (see
   the discussion of environmental quality standards
   below).  Noise ordinances are more likely in metro-
   politan cities (40% of the central cities and 38% of
   the suburbs, compared to 28% of the  independent cities).
   The North Carolina  report mentions 30% utilization and  two and
   one-half times more use in SM SA1 s than other cities.

7. Tree preservation ordinance—31% (10%).  With the excep-
   tion of the cities of over 500,000 and cities in the
   South  (both of which had 20% utilization rates), the
   proportion of localities using these ordinances is
                         42

-------
         fairly constant across all categories of cities.  The
         North Carolina report showed similar utilization rates with 37%
         reporting the preservation requirements as part of a
         set of subdivision requirements, and 25% reporting
         "tree ordinances."

      8. Erosion control ordinance--16% (23%).  Their use is
         most frequent in the West and Northeast (21%), as well
         as in suburban cities (21%).  The North Carolina survey  indicated a
         25% utilization rate for "sedimentation/erosion controls."

      9. Restrictions on nonreturnable bottles--l% (1%).  Only
         fifteen cities and two counties report such bans.

An additional ordinance which is noted separately by a number of  respon-
dents involves controls on burning.  The North Carolina survey indicates
that more than two-thirds (68%) of their respondents report using it.

In summary, there are many land use controls that can be, and are being,
brought to bear upon the problem of environmental protection or enhance-
ment.  Although many of them address only a portion of the problem, some
of them address the basic roots of it.  These controls, on the average,
are more likely to be utilized than the other environmental programs
discussed later in the remainder of this section.  The greater utiliza-
tion of land use controls may stem, in part, from the broad acceptance
of the genre as traditional, and as a legitimate exercise of the
"police powers."  In addition, local governments report they have ex-
pertise in land use and this no doubt contributes to the more extensive
utilization of land use controls as a means of managing the environment.


CONSERVATION (OR ENVIRONMENTAL) SECTION IN MASTER PLAN

"The general  plan—variously known as the comprehensive plan, master
plan, guide plan, development plan—is perhaps the oldest of the tech-
niques for guiding urban expansion in use today.""  But it is only in
recent years that there has been a movement to include a conservation
element or environmental  section in the plan, thus bringing environmental
factors into sharper focus for the local decision making process.  It is
part of an increasing philosophy that the comprehensive plan must go
beyond merely the physical  layout and consider the entire range of social
"F. Stuart Chapin, Jr., "Existing Techniques of Shaping Urban Growth,"
in H. Wentworth Eldredge (ed.), Tarn?ng Mega 1opoUs;  Volume 11,  How to
Manage an Urbanized World (Garden City:  Anchor Books, 1967), p. 729.

-------
values.  Approximately one-fourth of the cities (27%)  responding to the
question of the master plan say it includes a conservation or environ-
mental section; almost one-third (31%) say that it is  under consideration
(see Table
Of the four regions, inclusion of an environmental  component is most
common in the Northeast (kQ%) , and most often cited as under consider-
ation in the West (48%) .   The latter is due, in large part, to a
California state law requiring local governments to include such an
element in their plans.'   Metropolitan cities are more likely than
independent cities to have either an environmental  section in their
master plan or to be considering it.  There is no apparent relationship
between city size and inclusion of the environmental section.

The data for the counties are very similar:  2k% of those responding
to the question have an environmental section in their master plan and
an additional k$% have it under consideration.  Southern counties lag
behind the rest of the country in adoption or consideration of such an
element; k7% of them have neither adopted it nor are contemplating it
(see Table
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS

"The establishment of standards is a crucial step in any pollution control
program," suggests J. Clarence Davies III in his book The Politics of
Pollut?on.+  They provide goals, a measuring stick to evaluate progress,
and are a basis for determining what actions should be taken.  Standards—
whether they are merely statements of qualitative goals, or whether they
are quantitative references to environmental quality or to emmissions and
effluents—can be valuable as goals or "marching orders," to use Davies1
phrase, even if they are not enforced.  But when the standards are moni-
tored and enforced, their effectiveness increases sharply.  The question
in the survey does not ask about the nature or content of the standards,
but does ask whether the "municipality [has] officially adopted, moni-
tored, or enforced environmental quality standards" in the areas of air,
noise, sewerage, or water.  The rate of adoption varies sharply, as
might be expected.  With an increased role for the federal and state
governments in setting quality standards, many cities have dropped out
 California Government Code, Section 65302, amended in 1970.

+J. Clarence Davies III, The Politics of Pollution (New York:  Pegasus,
1970), p. 153-

-------
of the field or have not entered it (and in some states they are pro-
hibited from adopting their own standards).  The cities'  role is
stronger and more independent, however, in those instances where they
maintain their own systems, such as sewerage and water.

The situation frequently is different in the case of air and noise
standards.  Air pollution is very often tackled on a broader geograph-
ical base than the city-county and regional efforts are not unusual.
Noise pollution on the other hand is more likely to be a problem in
more developed areas (except where special land uses, such as airports,
present a problem).

The survey results reflect these conditions.  Of the cities responding
to the questionnaire, 53% report having adopted sewerage standards and
43% having adopted water standards.  But only 18% have officially adopted
air quality standards, and the same proportion report adoption of noise
standards.  Almost two-thirds of the cities (62%) have adopted standards
in at least one of the four areas, with a progression from 57% of the
smallest city size category to 100% for the largest (see Table 45).

The data for counties indicate greater adoption of air quality standards--
reflecting their greater role—with 31% of the counties responding to
the questionnaire saying they have adopted air quality standards.  But
otherwise the counties are less likely to have adopted standards, with
41% having adopted sewerage standards, 31% water, and 6% noise.   Half
of the counties have adopted standards in at least one of the four areas
(see Table 46).

The relationship between city size and air pollution noted earlier can
be seen in this set of data, with the larger cities more likely to
have adopted air quality standards.  In specific numbers, 43% of the
cities over 100,000 as compared to 16% for cities between 10,000 and
100,000 have adopted such standards.  Central cities are more likely to
report air quality standards (31%) than other cities.  Cities in the
North Central area are most likely to have adopted them (26%), while
those in the West are the least likely (10%).  The small  number of
Western cities which have adopted air quality standards is offset by
the large proportion (70%) of Western counties who have.

Noise standards show no relationship to city size, but they do to county
size.  They are most likely to have been adopted in the West and in
metropolitan areas.

Sewerage and water standards are more likely in larger cities than
smaller cities, and occur most frequently in the South and in central
cities.

As noted above, standards may be helpful  even if they are not enforced.
But the data indicate that there are a number of situations where
                               45

-------
municipal standards are not being monitored or enforced.  For instance,
the number of cities in which noise standards are "regularly monitored/
measured" is only 39% of the number that have adopted noise standards;
seventy-six report monitoring but 196 report adopting noise standards.
The ratios of monitoring to adoption are higher for the other types of
standards.  The proportions are 86% for air pollution standards, 87%
for sewerage, and 93% for water (see Table 47).  It should be noted,
however, that it is possible for more cities to be monitoring standards
than to have adopted them, because some states reserve standard setting
to themselves but delegate enforcement to the local cpmmunities.  This
is illustrated in the county data which indicate sixty-one counties
report adoption of air pollution standards, but sixty-seven report
regular monitoring/measuring air pollution standards (see Table 48).
There is no consistent pattern for this "monitoring ratio," although the
smallest cities generally have the lowest ratios, and the central cities
generally have the highest.

The disproportionately low "monitoring ratio" for noise standards may be
a realization that the caveats expressed in a recent NIMLO study are true.
That study noted that (1) enforcement was expensive, (2) identification
of the noise maker was difficult because of background noise, which if
less than ten decibels lower than the noise being monitored cannot be
distinguished, (3) the ordinance had to specify the distance at which
noise was to be measured, (4) decibel limits had to be specified for
different frequencies, and (5) enforcement was difficult when noise re-
sulted from several sources.'

Not only do a relatively small proportion of local governments who
report having adopted noise standards indicate they regularly monitor
them, but the nature of the enforcing department differs sharply from
the other types of standards.  For example, air pollution standards are
frequently enforced by a local air pollution control agency, environ-
mental protection agency, or health department.  Only occasionally  is
enforcement responsibility assigned to the police, planning/zoning, or
building departments.  In contrast, noise pollution enforcement  is most
frequently the responsibility of the police, building, and planning/
zoning departments.  It is also interesting to note that sewerage and
water standards are most likely to be enforced by the department
  Stuart  F.  Lewin, Alan H. Gordon, and Channing J. Hartelius, Law and the
Municipal  Ecology  (Washington, D.C.:  National Institute of Municipal Law
Officers,  1970)• PP- 75~76 as cited  in Joseph F. Zimmerman, "The Munici-
pal Stake  in  Environmental Protection," The Municipal Year Book 1972
(Washington, D.C.:  The  International City Management Association,  1972),
p.  109.

-------
responsible for operation of the service or facility, rather than an inde-
pendent group such as the health department or environmental protection
agency.


ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS (EIS)

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was signed into law on
January 1,  1970.  One of its provisions required the preparation of a
statement assessing the environmental impact of major Federal projects.
A number of states and cfties have adopted their own "1ittle-NEPAs" and
have adopted similar requirements for environmental impact statements.
One of these states is California, which adopted its Environmental
Quality Act in 1970.  It requires that "all local governmental  agencies
shall make  an environmental impact report on any project they intend to
carry out which may have a significant effect on the environment."  At
first this was interpreted to mean only public projects; but the State
Supreme Court in September 1972 ru,led that it included any private
projects which involved governmental  action of other than a "ministerial"
nature (i.e., If a city grants approval on a project for which it could
have denied approval, then the project is subject to an environmental
impact report).  Subsequent guidelines spelled out in a thirty-five page
document  exempted small projects and also created a Negative Declaration
procedure (i.e., if the project will  not have a significant impact, a
full report is not necessary).

California's requirement results in a biased response to our survey of
whether cities across the nation have adopted their own environmental
impact statement (EIS) requirements.   Table ^9 indicates that 30% of
all responding cities have some form of EIS requirement and 70% do not.
Only 17% of the non-Western cities have an EIS requirement compared to
70% of Western cities.  But when California cities are excluded, only
25% of the other Western cities have such a requirement.  This  is still
larger than the other regions, but much closer to the proportion for the
rest of the nation.  For the entire nation excluding California cities,
only 17% have an EIS requirement.

The same pattern occurs for counties; 66% of the Western counties—most
of which are in California—indicate a requirement for EIS's on public
and private projects, compared to 12% of the counties on the other three
regions of  the nation.  Similarly, three-fourths of the Western counties
(75%) have some form of EIS requirement, while three-fourths of the
other counties do not (see Table 50).
 Guidel ines for Implementation of_ the Cal i fornia Envi ronmental  Qua! i ty
Act of 1970 (Sacramento;  State of California, Office  of the Secretary
for Resources, 1973).

-------
Western cities with an EIS requirement for private projects — 96% of which
are California cities — are more likely to permit the private developer to
write the EIS on private projects, than are the other regions (53% of
the Western cities, compared to 30% of the cities in the other regions).
Consultants to the municipality are involved in the EIS preparation
process in approximately one-fourth of the cities (27% of all cities with
EIS requirements, including 29% of the Western and 24% of the others,
see Tables 51-52 for city and county data, respectively).
Review is most likely to be carried out by the administrative staff
and/or the city's legislative body  (46%).  Another 23% said the review
was done by the chief executive.  Only 13% listed citizens or citizen
groups as reviewers.  Generally the review process involves more than one
step, and almost one-third of the respondents listed others as involved
in the review process, with the planning commission most likely to be spec-
ified (see Tables 53~54 for city and county data, respectively).
MORATORIA

When the California Supreme Court issued its ruling in the Friends of
Mammoth vs Mono County case stipulating that private projects were covered
in the state's requirement for environmental impact reports before public
action could be taken, most cities  in the state were unprepared.  Their
first response was to place a moratorium on the issuing of building
permits and similar actions.  These moratoria are reflected in the data
that indicate 26% of the cities  in  the West responding to that question
have imposed a moratorium.  This tool has been used elsewhere, too,  inas-
much as 17% of cities in other regions also have imposed some kind of
moratorium for a total of 19% of all cities (see Table 55).  In some
cases it may be a temporary ban while a study or a facility (e.g., sew-
age plant) is completed.  In some cases, however, the cause stems from a
more fundamental concern—such as part of a limited-growth (or no-
growth) policy-and the ban may  be  for a longer period of time.

Prohibiting building permits is  the most common ban, imposed by 62%
of the cities indicating a moratorium.  Water and sewer connections  have
been stopped in 41% of these cities.  Requests for rezoning have been
prohibited in 36% of the cities  (see Table 56).  Obviously some cities
imposed moratoria on more than one  action.

The counties' data show similar  findings.  Twice as many Western counties
have imposed bans as have other  counties (33% compared to 17% for a  total
of 21%).  Similarly, building permits are most likely to be banned  (52%),
sewer-water connections are next  (45%) and rezoning requests are
involved  in one-third of the cities  (33%, see Tables 57-58).
                                 48

-------
TAX INCENTIVES AND EFFLUENT CHARGES

One strategy that may be used to improve the environment is to stimulate
business and industry through tax incentives and subsidies to take the
action necessary to achieve the desired level of environmental quality.
An alternate strategy to stimulate action involves effluent charges—
basically a penalty structure that places a charge on the polluter for
discharging pollutants into the environment.  There are many variations
of the "carrot strategy" of tax incentives or subsidies as there are of
the "stick strategy" of penalty charges.

This survey of cities has disclosed that very few cities use the tax
incentive-subsidy approach.  Only 3% of the cities say they use it, and
only an additional 1% claim it is under consideration (see Table 59).
Counties report only slightly more frequent use or consideration--9% of
the counties report its use and an additional 5% have it under consider-
ation (see Table 60).  Among the variations noted by the users are:
agricultural preserves which reduce the taxes on agricultural land on
the urban fringe for a period of years, providing the land is not developed
but rather is left in agriculture or as open space; increased density
permitted if a certain portion of the land is preserved as open-space
(or for other specified programs such as soundproofing); exemptions from
assessed valuations and property taxes for pollution-control devices;
tax-free industrial revenue bonds to finance the acquisition and instal-
lation of anti-pollution equipment; and waiver of park-fees where natural
features of the landscape are protected.

The reportedly low utilization rate may be due to a number of factors,
including a misunderstanding of some of the tax-incentives and subsidies
actually used by cities.  Other factors might include a reluctance to
give up any of its scarce revenues, as well as a reluctance to apparently
reward a polluter.  A lack of legal authority for local  governments in the
area of taxation may also account for its low utilization.

The use of effluent charges or some other system of charges or some
other system of taxes or fines that are related to the quality and
quantity of discharges into the environment is more frequent.  Almost
a quarter of the cities (2k%)  say they use such a system, and another
5% report they have it under consideration (see Table 61).  The data
for counties are similai—22% report its use and 3% report it under
consideration (see Table 62).   But again these results may not
accurately reflect the real utilization of this technique, as some
cities apparently include any anti-pollution ordinance that involves
a fine.   Some of the variations being used by the cities and counties
include:  sewer charges based on BOD (biochemical oxygen demand), SS
(suspended solids), and/or overstrength wastes, and a separate fee for
industrial  waste discharge.  The data indicate that larger units for

-------
government are more likely than smaller ones to use it.  City data
indicate the West is least likely to use it, but county data show the
most frequent use in the West.
INITIATING LAW SUITS

The courts are playing an increasing role in policy making in the
United States, and the area of environmental protection is not an
exception.  Suits have been filed by citizens, by corporations, and
by governments.  They have been filed by those acting in the name of
environmental protection and by those acting in the name of economic
freedom or other values.

Cities have been the initiator of suits on a number of occasions; 10%
of the cities answering the question indicate that they have filed a
major legal suit on an environmental matter in the last two years.
There is a tendency for Northeastern and North Central cities to use this
technique more than those in the West or South.  The latter is least
likely to have filed suit (see Table 63).

The data for the counties indicate a similar utilization rate, but some
differences in use patterns.  Some ]k% of the counties have initiated
suits.  But unlike cities, there is a clearer difference between the
largest size category of counties and the smallest with the former
more than four times as likely to file a suit.  In our sample of counties,
Southern counties are most likely to have filed suits and those in the
the Northeast are least likely (see Table 6k).

The suits show a wide range of subject matter.  Some suits are designed
to take action against polluters, while others seek to prevent pollution
by halting a project.  In several instances there have been attempts to
force other governmental agencies to apply existing law (e.g., prevent
approval of a project before an  EIS could be produced, or before a
master plan could be completed).  In at least one case, the suit repre-
sented an attempt to gain the authority necessary to safeguard the environ-
ment in the future.  The subject of the suit was the right of the city to
adopt and enforce landfill regulations, disputing the claim that the
state had pre-empted the field.
LOCAL  INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICE AGREEMENTS

The strategies examined in this section thus far have involved a program
of action undertaken by a city or a county within its own jurisdiction.
However, many cities and counties are cooperating with others in a variety
of intergovernmental programs to safeguard and enhance the environment.
Since  a survey of the cities had been taken less than a year earlier,
                               50

-------
this survey purposely omits reference to this strategy of managing
the envi ronment.

That study, conducted in May 1972 by the International City Management
Association and the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations,
indicates that the utilization rate of service agreements with other
local governments ranges from 2% to 12% of the cities, depending on
the type of environmental function involved.*  Cities are most likely
to use service agreements with other units of local government for
sewage disposal (12%), water supply (9%), solid waste disposal (7%),
and planning (7%).

The data, as recalculated from that study and presented in Table 65,
show larger cities (over 25,000 population) are more likely to use
agreements than smaller cities (2,500 to 25,000) for nine of the twelve
environmental services.  Smaller cities are more likely to use them
only for water distribution services (5% compared to 3%) and zoning and
subdivision control (3% compared to 2%).  Differences generally were
quite small, one exception being sewage disposal, which shows larger
cities more than twice as likely to use agreements as smaller cities.

One other pattern emerges from these data.  Of those using agreements,
the smaller cities are more likely than the larger cities to turn to
other cities and counties (on nine of the twelve environmental functions)
while the larger cities utilize special districts and COG's or other
regional units more often than small cities (on seven of the twelve
environmental functions, each type of government).

The study also indicates that the factors most frequently cited as inhi-
biting agreements are limitations on independence of actions (k8% of
the responding cities which listed any reason), inequitable apportionment
of cost (22%), and adverse public reaction (9%).  The reason most fre-
quently cited for the use of agreements is the desire to take advantage
of economies of scale.
""The data presented in this section is recalculated from:  Joseph F.
Zimmerman, Urban Data Service, Intergovernmental Service Agreements
for Smaller Municipalities (Washington, D.C.:   International City
Management Association, 1973), and Joseph F. Zimmerman, "Meeting Ser-
vice Needs Through Intergovernmental Agreements," in The Municipal
Yearbook   1973 (Washington, D.C.:  International City Management
Association, 1973), pp. 79-88
                               51

-------
IMPORTANT OR INNOVATIVE PROGRAMS:  OPEN-ENDED RESPONSES

In addition to the closed-ended questions reviewed above,  the  question-
naire also asks the local governments to indicate "the most important
or innovative actions or programs...undertaken in the last two years
to improve or safeguard the environment."  Limited resources prevent an
analysis of all of these open-ended responses.  But a randomized selection
of seventy-five actions indicates that a wide range of activity is deemed
to be "important or innovative" by local governments.  While some may
regard their selections as minor or.mundane, the list does serve to
indicate the interests and activities of local governments.

Several of the respondents report intergovernmental or regional activi-
ties--e.g., a contract for regional  wastewater treatment,  intergovern-
mental contracts for solid waste management, joint construction and
operation of an incinerator, and the creation of a regional anti-pollution
authority.

Several cities consider some of the actions discussed earlier in this
report as among their most important or innovative actions—e.g.,
several list their environmental impact statement requirements, and
several others list the creation of citizen advisory committees.

Actions to solve the solid waste problem are noted by many of the local
governments, for example, compaction of solid waste, stopping open
burning, removal of junk cars, recycling programs, a new incinerator,
use of a sanitary landfill to replace an open dump, and free collection
of household trash and garbage.

Another area of concern is that of sewage.  Improved sewage treatment
facilities is the action cited by the largest number of local governments
in this randomized sample.  Related actions include references to sewage
studies, including research into groundwater recharge of treated sewage
effluent, secondary treatment of sewage effluent, and the extension of
sewers.  Several cite improvements in the stormwater system, e.g.,
ponding and percolation of some stormwater.

A number of local governments list actions concerning land use controls.
For example, the development or revision of the land use plan, subdivision
requirements, design standards ordinance, the adoption of an architec-
tural theme, and the adoption of a filling and dredging ordinance.
Several list their purchase of land for open-space or parks, while one
cites limitation on the use of a beach area.  Others list aesthetic
improvements such as programs for preventive maintenance, tree planting,
and tree pruning.

Several local governments specify the development of noise ordinances
including the setting of standards for contracts for services and
                               52

-------
equipment.  Air pollution programs include establishment of air moni-
toring programs, reduction of emissions from a power generating plant,
and the use of propane in police vehicles,  Educational programs such
as an environmental arboretum and the annual observance of Earth Day
are also 1isted.
SUMMARY

A large number of techniques or strategies are available to local
governments involved in environmental management.  Strategies derived from
areas of traditional authority or operation are more likely to be used
than others.  For example, land use controls have been considered a
traditional exercise of police powers and have been adopted (even if not
always rigorously enforced) by American local governments for many
decades.  Land use controls are the tools most likely to be used by
local governments, with some individual techniques being used by almost
half (or more) of the units.

Similarly, adoption of environmental quality standards is much more
likely for systems operated by the local government.  Cities are more
likely to have adopted standards for sewerage (53%) and water (*»3%)
than for air  (18%) or noise (18%).  Similarly sewerage and water standards
are more likely to be enforced by the city, usually by the operating
department.

Effluent charges or a penalty structure in which business and industry
pay for discharging pollutants into the environment is more frequently
used, according to the respondents, than a strategy of tax incentives
or subsidies.  The former is reported used by approximately one-fourth
of the cities, while only 3% report the use of tax incentives or subsidies.

The strategy of local governments requiring environmental impact statements
is a new phenomenon stemming from the federal precedent established in
NEPA passed in 1969.  Approximately 30% of the cities report a local EIS
requirement, but when we exclude California cities as atypical (since
they are required by state law to use an EIS process for local decisions
on public and private projects), only 17% of the other cities use this
strategy.

Moratoria have been imposed by 19% of all cities responding to the survey,
many of which are California cities which imposed moratoria after a
state Supreme Court decision on the applicability of the EIS requirement
caught virtually all of the cities by surprise.  Excluding the Western
cities, only 17% of the cities surveyed have used moratoria.

The practice of initiating law suits is still a relatively rare practice-
having been reported by only 10% of the cities.
                               53

-------
The use of intergovernmental service agreements for environmental
management is also relatively uncommon, as only 2% to \2% of the
cities report an agreement, depending on the environmental function
involved.

-------
 F.   Evaluation  of  Environmental  Management Strategies
 Introduct ion

The previous sections of this report have examined local governmental
utilization of a variety of environmental management strategies and some
alternate organizational forms.  The data from the survey of cities
over 10,000 and counties over 50,000 indicate varied utilization of
the different alternatives.  For example, almost every city indicated
some land use control, but only a handful reported a program involving
tax incentives.  The data also indicate that utilization rates for
different classifications of cities vary considerably, as well.  This
knowledge can be helpful to those interested in developing plans for
environmental management programs.

Other information useful to local officials includes what local govern-
ments and others think of the alternate strategies and organization
forms.  If most local government officials believe a particular
strategy is effective, perhaps officials who view that tool negatively
might want to re-include it on a list of potential techniques.  But
even more important are the evaluations of those who have used the
techniques.   If the perception of users and non-users were similar
then the analysis need not differentiate between the two groups.  A
closer look at the respondents' evaluations of the effectiveness of
the tools indicates a significant difference between the perceptions
of users and non-users.  One example of very different perceptions is
use of moratoria where 32% of non-users term it effective, 23% ineffec-
tive, and the remainder neutral.   (Note that an "index" score con-
structed by ignoring the neutrals and subtracting the other two
proportions from each other was only three.)  On the other hand, users
considered moratoria decidedly effective; 62% rate it as an effective
tool, while 15% view it as ineffective (for an index score of 47).
A comparison of ranks of effectiveness assigned to each alternative
based on their index scores places moratoria last when all respondents
are used as the basis; but a ranking based on the index score for
each  alternative's users places four other strategies below it.
In another example, 14% of all of the responding cities consider tax
incentives an ineffective technique, and only about half (54%) view it
as effective (for an index score of 40); but no user of tax incentives
considers it ineffective, and almost three-fourths rate it effective
rather than neutral, for an index of 72.

In all but three cases analyses of evaluations of a strategy by local
governments are based on the responses of users of that alternative.
The three exceptions are:  intergovernmental and regional  arrange-
                               55

-------
merits, land use controls, and environmental  quality standards.
Evaluations of intergovernmental and regional arrangements use the
data from all respondents because our survey does not ask about
its utilization but rather relies on data from an earlier study of
service agreements.  Land use controls are used in some form by
almost every local government, and so data from all local govern-
ments are used.  The situation concerning environmental quality
standards is quite complicated because some states permit local
governments to adopt and enforce standards,  other states set stan-
dards but delegate enforcement to the local  governments, still
other states have pre-empted the field entirely, and some cities
report setting standards but turning to state agencies for enforce-
ment.

The strategies are discussed in the following sequence:  first, the
three organizational alternatives to manage  the environment in the
order of preference fay city "users" — a single environmental
agency, use of citizen advisory boards, and intergovernmental and
regional arrangements; then seven alternative action strategies in
the order of preference by city "users" — land use controls,
environmental quality standards, tax incentives, penalty charges,
moratoria, environmental impact statements,  and law suits.
ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCY

The concept of a single environmental agency is viewed as an
effective way of organizing to promote and secure environmental
quality.  Its evaluated effectiveness index score is 70, with only
6% of the city users who offer an evaluation labeling it as in-
effective compared to J6% calling it effective (see Table 67).
The index score for non-users of kl  is considerably lower or less
favorable.

Large city users view their organizational form as more effective
than do those from smaller cities (composite index score for cities
over 100,000 is 83 compared to 68 for cities below that size).
Mayor-council cities view it more favorably (78) than manager-
council cities (70).  Counties with  an index of Ik — 73% effective,
5% ineffective — consider it more effective than cities (see Table 68)
Federal respondents view it as very  effective (index of 88), but
state respondents are more negative  (index of 38).

A single environmental agency is one answer to the fragmentation
of responsibilities often found within the city's governmental
structure.   It can serve as the developer or coordinator of a com-
plete plan to protect the environment, thus focusing responsibility
while avoiding conflicting (or duplicating) programs.  Several
governmental jurisdictions have considered it or adopted it in order
to change their influence structure  — e.g., broadening the focus of
                                56

-------
their environmental program by reducing the influence of a more
traditional department such as health or public works.  An attempt
to change traditional lines of communication and influence can be
expected to cause opposition and conflict, thereby reducing effec-
tiveness.  A single environmental agency is likely to play the
role of an advocate.  Although this may be useful and desirable,
it may not be if other departments assume that the environment is
not their concern and act accordingly.  The administrative style
of some chief executives favors cooperation and consensus rather
than the advocacy or adversary process.  Further, the advocate role
is likely to bring the department into conflict with other city
departments which may be major polluters.  The result is that a new
single environmental agency needs the strong support of the chief-
executive.  Yet a single environmental agency, with its greater
public visibility, may also be useful as a demonstration of a city's
commitment to environmental protection as well as a rallying point
for environmental interest groups.  For these reasons it may be
considered effective by many users.
CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARD

Perhaps the most interesting finding about the evaluation of citizen
advisory boards is that those communities which create new boards
generally rate citizen advisory boards more effective than those
who expand existing bodies.  Although the evaluation question
addresses the effectiveness of citizen boards in general, ques-
tions pertaining to utilization addresses the alternatives of
creating a new group or expanding an existing one.  These are not
exclusive categories.  A number of cities have done both, since the
environmental problem is frequently fragmented with single-purpose
organizations.  Examination of the data for all  those who have
created a new advisory group shows an evaluated effectiveness index
of ^9» based on 61% rating citizen advisory groups as effective and
12% viewing them as ineffective   (see Table 68).  This represents
a sharp contrast to those who have expanded an existing group.  Their
index score for citizen advisory groups is only 27, with 47% rating
them effective and 20% considering them ineffective (see Table 69).

Between non-users, who always rate a strategy lower than users, and
those using the perceived less effective means of expanding existing
boards, the index score of all cities is quite low.  The index score
of 22 is second lowest of all of the strategies evaluated.  But this
low score is comparable to the results of the North Carolina study
which found that only 17% rated the general tool of "citizen parti-
cipation" as very effective in achieving environmental quality,
while ^5% rated it moderately effective,     38% considered it only
slightly effective, and 2% labeled it not effective.
                               57

-------
The patterns of perceived effectiveness are similar for the two
groups of users, with users of expanded boards less enthusiastic
in all but one category of cities.  Western cities have the
lowest index scores; independent cities rate the boards as more
effective than do metropolitan cities.  Cities with city managers
are more critical of the effectiveness of citizens advisory
boards than those using a mayor-council form of government (they
are also less likely to use them).  Larger cities which have
created new citizen boards tend to see them as more effective than
do smaller cities, but there is no consistent relationship between
these variables when the data for cities using expanded boards
were examined.

The data for the counties show a much smaller difference between
the two groups of users with the index scores being k$ and 41 for
those creating new boards and those expanding existing ones,
respectively  (see Tables 70-71).  State and federal respondents'
index scores are consistent with the cities and counties, total-
ling 47 and 34 respectively.

With respect to the effectiveness of citizens advisory groups,  it
is clear that the effectiveness of these groups depends on the
functions assigned to them, the personnel appointed to them, and
the amount and quality of staff support given to them.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AND REGIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

The evaluated effectiveness index score based on the responses of
all cities evaluating the strategy of intergovernmental and regional
arrangements is only 46 (with 53% of the cities rating this strategy
as effective and \k% considering it ineffective).   There is rela-
tively little variation among the cities (see Table 72).

Although many observers feel that intergovernmental and regional
arrangements are valuable in the area of environmental protection,
to handle such matters on a broader geographical basis, there are
sufficient problems in the cities' view to minimize its effectiveness.
Perhaps the fear of limitation upon independence of action  (either
a desire to do more than the regional standards or program, or a
desire to do less) and the problems of apportioning costs (noted
by cities as factors inhibiting the use of service agreements — one
form of intergovernmental arrangements)  detract from such advantages
as efficiency and uniformity.

Counties reported similar overall findings, with an index score of 52,
based on 6k% of the counties rating this strategy as effective and
\2% viewing it as ineffective.  There are larger variations between
categories of counties — e.g., the index for Southern counties is
lowest with 31, compared to the highest index score of 79 for North
                               58

-------
Central counties.  Metropolitan counties are less enthusiastic about
this strategy (index score of *»6) than non-metropolitan counties.
This may reflect a greater homogeneity within the non-metropolitan
counties encouraging the use of intergovernmental arrangements, while
the conflicts between central cities and suburban cities within
metropolitan areas create problems and doubts about the effectiveness
of such cooperative measures (see Table 73).  Both state and federal
respondents see  it as more effective than do the local governments,
with index scores of 59 and 61, respectively.
LAND USE CONTROLS

Land use controls are perceived by the cities as the most effective
of the seven action strategies suggested to them for promoting and
securing environmental quality.  Ninety percent of the cities rated
it very effective or effective, while only 3% rated it as ineffective
or very ineffective.  This results in an evaluated effectiveness
index of 87.  All classifications of cities rated it highly, although
there were some differences.  The very largest cities (over 500,000)
were a little less enthusiastic about this strategy (index of 72),
but in general there is no relationship to size.  Similarly, Southern
cities (index of 83) and central cities (84) were less enthusiastic
than other cities.  Counci1-manager cities viewed land use controls
as more effective than do mayor-council cities with scores of 89 and
80 respectively (see Table 7^)•

The counties' index score 81 also is very high based on 86% rating it
effective while only 5% consider in ineffective.  County data also
show that Southern, metropolitan and non-administrator counties are
less enthusiastic than other types of counties (see Table 75).

State and federal respondents also view land use controls as effective
programs, with index scores of 78 and 75 respectively.

Although the survey did not ask respondents the reasons for their
evaluation,  it appears that Southerners are more concerned about
limitations upon "free enterprise" and are more likely to be critical
of any "controls."  The largest units of government may see land-use
controls as of less value to them because of the relative unavailability
of land for development and because of the greater complexity of their
environmental problems.  The generally high evaluation of land use
controls may reflect the importance they attach to land use problems, their
extensive utilization of land use controls, and the availability of
expertise in these matters, rather than an evaluation of the effective-
ness of the controls themselves.

It should also be noted that the effectiveness of land use controls
depends upon their enforcement.  Many critics of land use plans, for
example, have observed that amendments, special use permits, and
                               59

-------
variances are frequently granted in response to pressures on parti-
cular cases without any real reconsideration of the entire plan.  One
state respondent in commenting about the utility of local government
land use controls in promoting and securing environmental quality
noted its criticalness by saying, "This is where the ballgame is lost."
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS

The use of environmental quality standards is an accepted method of
securing a better environment.  Its evaluated effectiveness index
score is 73, ranking it only behind land use controls.  More than
three-fourths of the cities (77%)  rated it effective, and only k%
labeled their use ineffective (see Table 76).

Central cities are more likely to have adopted environmental quality
standards and are also more likely to have rated them as an effec-
tive strategy (index score of 76 compared to 72 for suburbs and 71
for independent cities).  The West (score of 76) and manager-council
cities (75) rated them as more effective than did comparable cities.
There is no consistent  relationship to city size, despite a
tendency for larger cities to be more likely than smaller cities to
have adopted standards  in at least one of the four environmental areas
examined.

Counties view the effectiveness of standards even more favorably, with
an index score of 82; 853> rate it as effective and only 3% call them
ineffective.  This index score is one point higher than that given  to
land use controls.  Western counties, like Western cities, rated them
as more effective than do other regions; 88 compared to scores of 72 to
86 for the other three  regions (see Table 77).

The federal respondents viewed standards as very effective (index
score of 9*0 which may  reflect their own activity.  States view local
standards less favorably (index score of 59)> perhaps reflecting a
reluctance to see local governments enter into the field already filled
with state and federal activity.

The effectiveness of environmental quality standards  in acheiving
environmental quality depends, in part, upon their enforcement.  As
was noted earlier in the section on the utilization of standards, a
considerable number of  local governments have adopted a set of environ-
mental standards but have not enforced them.  Although even unenforced
standards may be useful as a goal, their effectiveness rests upon
enforcement.  A considerable proportion of cities raised the problem
of unrealistic standards — especially considering limited resources to
remedy any deficiencies — as one of their complaints against  the
states and federal government.
                               60

-------
TAX INCENTIVES

None of the cities which have used and evaluated tax incentives
consider them to be ineffective; almost three-fourths of them
(72%)  said they are effective, resulting in an index of 72
(see Table 78).  This contrasts with the views of non-users,
whose index is only 40 (54% rating it effective, and }k%
ineffective).

Counties view the use of tax  incentives less enthusiastically—an
index score of 54; with only 8% of the users seeing it as ineffective
compared to 62% rating it effective.  But this is still relatively
high compared to the index scores given other strategies; and
it is still higher than that given by non-using counties, index
score of 45 (see Table 79).   Its limited use precludes any further
analysis of sub-sets of users.

Federal  and state respondents evaluate tax incentives similarly
to city users with index scores of 72 and Ik respectively.

The reluctance of non-users to see it as an effective strategy,
as noted earlier, may be due to it being interpreted as a reward
for pollution, by both city officials as well as the public.
A shortage of revenue and of authority to adopt such a strategy
may also be factors.  But subsidies as an incentive to action
is not a new principle; and they can be effective if they
are used to stimulate action that otherwise would not be
taken, especially since economic justification is offered as
a rationale for continued pollution.
PENALTY CHARGES

The survey question asked for an evaluation of penalty charges
as a strategy to promote and secure environmental quality;
this was done in an effort to get local evaluation of the
concept of effluent charges, or as the question stated "penalty
(fine or tax) structure in which business and industry pay for
discharging pollutants directly into the environment."  It is not
clear that the cities responding all have the same reference,
as some may be thinking of service charges as effluent charges.
"Penalty charges" receives an evaluated effectiveness index score
of 59 from those indicating use in the earlier question; two-
thirds (67%) rate the strategy as effective, while only 8%
consider it ineffective (see Table 80) .  Non-users give it a
lower index score of 45; 60% effective and 15% ineffective.
There is no consistent relationship between size of the city
and the evaluation of this strategy by its users.  The North
                          61

-------
Centra] cities view it most favorably (69) while those in the
West are least favorably disposed (A?).   Independent cities rate
it more favorably (65) than cities in metropolitan areas (57).
Cities with city managers view it as more effective (62) than
those with the mayor-council form of government (52).

The data for counties are unusual in this instance's non-users
give it a higher index score than users  (^1  and 32 respectively).
Fewer users view it as effective (kk%) compared to 56% of the
non-users (see Table 8l).

State respondents give it an evaluated effectiveness index score
of 59, while it is *+6 for federal respondents.

The  use  of effluent charges has been praised as a device that
treats pollution as a cost thereby introducing its abatement
into the decision making process of the  businessman who is trying
to maintain an edge over his competitors.  It also may serve
as a source of revenue for a governmental environmental protection
program.  But others have labeled it as  a "license to pollute,"
and this image detracts from its utility.  Some critics have
also argued that the costs of the penalty charges will merely be
passed on to the consumer and the effect upon the business may
be minimized depending on the nature of  its competition.  The
strategy of penalty charges has also been critized by those who
hope to evolve change through cooperation.
MORATORIA

As noted in the introduction to this section, those who have
imposed a moratorium rate it as a much more effective strategy
than those who have not used it.  The evaluated effectiveness
index score is 4 7 for users, but only 3 for non-users.  The propor-
tion rating it as an effective strategy is approximately twice
as high for users compared to non-users, and non-users are
about twice as likely to rate it as an ineffective tool compared
to the users.   Among users, 62% rated it effective and 15% in-
effective, compared to 32% and 2S% respectively for non-users
(see Table 82).

The county data reflect a similar gap between users (index score
of ^8, with only k% rating it ineffective) and non-users (index
score of 3, with one-third considering it ineffective; see
Table 83.)

Federal and state respondents reflect non-users to a degree with
index scores of 16 and 39 respectively.
                          62

-------
There were some differences among users, however.  The West
and North Central users are least likely to rate it as an
effective tool (39 and 40 respectively), while the South and
Northeast view it more favorably (56 and 55 respectively).
Central cities consider them more effective (57) than do the
suburbs (47) or independent cities (33); mayor-council cities
rated it as more effective (55) than do counci1-manager cities
(44).

Although moratoria may be considered an admission that previous
planning or other programs have been ineffective, their use
may prove valuable if the delay is used to analyze alternatives
and to develop effective programs, rather than merely postponing
the resolution of the problem.  Their use frequently occurred
as the result of a crisis, and the use in those circumstances
is probably least open to criticism.  Its use as a permanent
or long-range solution may create strong criticism of the local
government by those adversely affected.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS

A city's experience with environmental impact statements (EIS)
may stem from Federal or state law or from their own require-
ment.  The focus of the report is on local governments'
actions in the area of environmental management.  The evaluated
effectiveness index of this group of users is 44, with 59% viewing
the EIS process as an effective strategy, while 15% consider it
ineffective (see Table 84).  Those familiar only with the
federal EIS requirement or who have not been involved at all with
the EIS have an index score of 25.

The West stands out as the region which views the EIS process as
most effeetive--its index score is 58, with only 10% of the users
considering it ineffective.  Non-Western cities give it an index
score of only 19.   County data are similar.  The index score
for all users is 31 (51% considering the statements effective
and 20% ineffective), but Western users give them an index score
of 48  (see Table 85).

The North Carolina study indicates that 18% of all  of their re-
spondents  rate them very effective, 45% as moderately, 30%
slightly, and 7% not effective.

Federal officials view  impact statements favorably  (index score
of 55), but states view them  less favorably with an  index score of
17, based  on only  39% calling the EIS process effective.
                          63

-------
The relatively low effectiveness rating for the E1S process
(only one other strategy ranks lower for city users)  may stem
from a number of factors—especial ly considering the  higher
rating given by Western users who are primarily California units
of government.  Some of the criticisms of the federal process may
have influenced the cities' evaluations, while some of these
criticisms may also be applicable to the EIS process  required
by local governments.  These criticisms include problems of
cost and delay, compounded by a lack of technical expertise
to accurately and objectively determine the environmental impact
of proposed projects.  In many instances the EIS process has empha-
sized procedural  requirements more than substantive content.*
For instance a review of federal EISs through January 1972
noted that although two-thirds of the projects had statements
indicating adverse environmental impacts for the project,
most projects were not changed as a result of the analyses.+
The General Accounting Office's review of the federal process
noted that inadequate technical analyses, inadequate  review of
the statements, and inadequate consideration of alternatives
marred the utility of the EIS procedure;^

Yet the EIS process has also been viewed as contributing to
the decision making process by including environmental impact con-
siderations as an explicit input into the decision making process.
And when the process is working as intended, these inputs occur
at the planning stage, i.e., early enough to make a difference.
Similarly, the impact of the EIS process is likely to be felt
in other areas of decision making as well, as a result of open-
ing up the entire process to public participation, and to the
special consideration of impacts of an action upon the social
environment.  The need to develop or review EISs has  forced
a number of agencies to expand their own expertise in the
environment field.  It has also encouraged greater coordination
among agencies both within a government and between  levels of
government.  And, of course, the EIS process has fulfilled its
manifest function of killing some potentially environmentally-
damaging projects.
'•See Lyle J. Sumek, "Environmental Impact Statements:  More Myth
 than Reality," in An Anthology of Selected Readings for the
 National Conference on Managing the Environment(Washington,D.C.
 1973), for a summary of strengths and weaknesses of the federal
 EIS process,

+This study  is cited in Frank Kreith, "Levels of Impact,"
 Envi ronment XV (January/February 1973), p. 30.

^General Accounting Office, Adequacy of Selected Environmental
 Impact Statements Prepared Under NEPA of 1969 (Report to the
 Subcommittee on Fisheries and Wildlife Conservation, House
 Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, 1972),  p. 64.

-------
One of the improvements that the state of California has made
to the process is the requirement that mitigating measures be
discussed whenever adverse environmental impacts are noted.
Future developments are likely to increase the significance of
the EIS process.  As one observer noted, the first generation of
suits were concerned with whether an EIS was required; the second
generation considered whether the EIS was adequate or merely
a pro-forma exercise; the third generation will address the
problem of whether the government has ignored the EIS."

Another development that may be on the horizon is the application
of the EIS process to the comprehensive plan itself.+

As the EIS process becomes an institutionalized part of the
decision making process, its weaknesses and inconsistent applications
will be modified; and as time goes on more cities will view the
EIS process as an effective means to promoting and securing
environmental quality.
LAW SUITS

The use of law suits is evaluated as the least effective of the
alternate environmental management strategies by the cities, with
an index score of *tO (the counties ranked it higher, with an
index score of 50).  Yet it is worth noting that this alter-
native is considered ineffective by only 19%, while more than
three times as many cities (or 59%) rate it as an effective
strategy (see Tables 86 and 87).  Federal respondents view it
more favorably (index of 55)  than do states (index of only 23).

Among the users of this strategy, large cities rate it as
more effective than small cities.  In fact, all eight of the
cities over 100,000 that indicate they have initiated a major
legal suit regarding environmental matters in the last two years
rate it as very effective or effective.  Central cities, without
regard to their size, are also very enthusiastic with an index
score of 92.   Southern users rate the strategy as more effective
than those from other regions (an index score of 67 for Southern
users compared to a composite index score of 37 for the other
regions).  Mayor-council cities view the use of law suits
more favorably than counci1-manager cities (index scores of 66
and 3^ respectively).
^Comments  of Nicholas C. Yost, Deputy Attorney General of California,
 at the National Conference on Regional Environmental Management,
 San Diego, February 1973-

+Comments of Robert C. Einsweiler at the National  Conference on
 Managing the Environment, Washington, D.C., May 1973, summarized
 in the Final Conference Report for the Conference.
                         65

-------
SUMMARY

Analysis of the evaluations of alternate strategies for environmental
management indicates that although the relative effectiveness of the
alternatives varies, each strategy is more likely to be considered
effective than ineffective.  Another finding is that although non-users
are more likely to be positive than negative, an evaluated effectiveness
index based upon the difference between these ratings given by users and
non-users indicates that users generally rate strategies as more effective
than do non-users.  A number of strategies that would appear to be
evaluated as relatively ineffective if the evaluations of all of the
cities were used, actually are evaluated as quite effective by users
of the technique.

The evaluated effectiveness index scores for cities are summarized
in Table 88.  Since a city may use one strategy but not another,
one cannot claim that the highest index score for any category of cities
indicates its most effective strategy.  But the table does indicate
the evaluated effectiveness score for each strategy for each category
of city users.
                               66

-------
G.   Factors Contributing  to  Development of  Environmental
     Management  Programs
The discussion of the utilization of alternative organizational
and action strategies for environmental management indicates a
wide range of use among the local governments.  One factor in-
fluencing the adoption of a strategy is the evaluation of it by
users.  The success (or failure) of a program has a strong impact
upon its adoption elsewhere.  But what general factors do local
governments see contributing to the development of environmental
management programs in their communities?  This question, along
with the views of our state and federal respondents, is considered
in this section.

When local government officials are asked, "What are the major
factors contributing to your municipality developing environmental
management programs?", they see their own role as "concerned
municipal officials" as crucial.  Three-fourths (75%) of the cities
cite this factoi—more than any other factor.  Similarly two-thirds
(67%) of the counties claim it, placing it as their second most
frequently indicated factor   (see Tables 89 and 90).  This
may actually reflect the role of the decision maker in this complex
policy area, but it may also represent a form of "self-congratula-
tion."  It is not insignificant that state and federal officials
are much less likely to mention the role of local officials.  Only
42% of the state officials indicate it as a major factor placing
it as their sixth (of eight) most frequent response; and federal
officials place it fourth, with 61% citing it as a major factor.

Officials at all three levels of government recognize and acknowl-
edge the stimulus of state and federal requirements to the
development of environmental management programs at the local
level.  Two-thirds (68%) of the cities cite it (their second most
frequent response).   Counties (77%), state officials (84%),
and federal officials (89%) are more likely to cite this
factor than any other.  State and federal officials are also
likely to see a strong role for "state or federal financial
incentives or assistance;" 84% of the state and 78% of the
federal respondents  cite this factor.   But local officials place
it only fifth among the eight factors, with 38% of the cities and
51% of the counties  listing it.   This gap perceived by local
governments between  these two roles of the state and federal
governments--i.e., promulgating requirements, and assisting local
governments to meet  those requirements--can easily lead to
discontent and criticism of the state and federal governments.
And in fact such complaints are cited by the local governments  in
response to several  questions, as discussed later in this report.
                           67

-------
The perception of the contribution of state and federal financial
assistance is not shared equally by all of the local governments.
Larger cities and counties are more likely to mention it than
smaller ones.  Southern cities, but not counties, are also
more likely to mention it than local governments in other regions.

The role of active environmental groups and public support in
general are also cited by large proportions of the respondents.
Half of the cities cite general public support (placing it third)
and 44% acknowledge the role of active environmental groups
(placing it fourth) in contributing to development of environmental
programs.  County, state and federal officials reverse the order,
with more respondents likely to list active groups than general
public support.

A number of respondents also recognize the role of the environ-
mental situation itself as a factor contributing to the develop-
ment of environmental management programs.  Environmental deterioration
is listed by 30% of the cities and k\% of the counties as an
important contributor.  Federal officials were most likely to
mention it  $6%),making it their fifth most frequent response; and
37% of state officials note it too.  Larger cities are more
likely to cite this factor than smaller cities; central cities
are more likely than suburban or independent cities.  But, there
is little regional variation.

Apparently permissive or enabling legislation is not considered
a major factor in the development of environmental management
programs.  The existence of enabling legislation permitting
governmental action is listed by only 28% of the cities and 46%
of the counties; 47% of state and 44% of federal officials also
cite  it.  Larger cities and counties, which may have more home-
rule, are more likely than smaller local governments to cite
it as a factor.

The factor least likely to be mentioned by all groups of respondents
is that of available expertise.  Only 19% of the cities and 27%
of the counties cite  it as a factor.  Federal officials are also
unlikely to cite it (22%) , and state officials are least
likely of all  (11%).  Whether these data  indicate a lack of
available expertise in local government, or a belief that expertise
is not essential to developing environmental management programs,
is not clear.  There  is some evidence for the latter, since local
governments  indicate a variety of expertise available within
their staffs, and from other sources.  But a lack of expertise  is
seen as one of the "major obstacles to environmental management"
(See the discussion of these data  in a later part of this report).
                           68

-------
In summary, local government officials see an important role for
concerned local decision makers and for the stimulus provided by
state and federal requirements in the development of environ-
mental management programs at the local level.  State and federal
officials share the view concerning state and federal requirements
and also add state and federal financial incentives or assistance
as a major factor, but do not consider the role of local  officials
as crucial.  This disagreement between local  officials and state and
federal officials is one of the sharpest and  most significant
evidenced by this survey.

-------
H.   Intergovernmental Relations
Introduction

Environmental quality is not the task of any single level  of government.
A successful program requires the participation of all three levels of
government—local, state and federal.  Each level must be concerned
with the activities of the others; and each must be aware of the per-
ceptions, values, and problems of the others.   The survey explored
several of these areas.  First, since the Environmental Protection
Agency is the primary federal environmental contact,the study sought
to learn the frequency of local government contact with the regional
and central offices of EPA.  In addition this  survey asks local govern-
ment officials to indicate their degree of satisfaction with these
contacts.  Second, since the federal requirement for environmental im-
pact statements (E!S) is of direct concern to both the federal  and
local governments, a number of questions were asked about the letter's
experience with the EIS process.  Third, the role of federal and state
governments and their interaction with local governments was addressed
in a number of direct questions (such as whether local governments
were having difficulty meeting federal standards) and indirect ones
(e.g., questions on sources of expertise, and sources of stimuli and
obstacles for environmental management programs  include the federal
government as one of the possible responses).   Fourth, local governments
were asked to indicate the problems they have encountered with federal
and state governments concerning environmental management.  This section
of the report will discuss these four aspects of intergovernmental
relations.
FREQUENCY AND EVALUATION OF CONTACTS WITH EPA

Frequency

Almost half of the cities (kl%) report frequent or very frequent contact
with EPA, but communication between EPA and the cities Is not constant
for all classifications of cities.  Larger cities are more likely to
be in contact with EPA and also to have more frequent contact than
smaller cities.  Only 1% of the cities over 100,000 report no contact
with EPA  compared to 17% of the smaller cities; and 27% of the  larger
cities report very frequent contact compared to 15? of the other cities.
Suburban cities report the least contact, with 25% reporting no contact
at all, and only 10% responding their contact is very frequent.  The
West also has less contact than other regions, with the South indica-
ting the most contact.  Cities with a mayor-council form of government
report more contact with EPA than counci1-manager cities (see Table 91).
                                70

-------
Evaluation

Only 3% of the cities complain about their contacts with either
the central office or regional office of the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency.  Contact with the regional offices is slightly
more satisfying than with the central office, according to local
respondents; 56% of the cities rate their contacts with the
regional office as satisfactory or very satisfactory, while k$%
of the cities express satisfaction with their central office
contracts.  The mean satisfaction rating for regional contact
is 2.4 and for central office contact it is 2.6, with the
possible range being 1.0 for very satisfactory and 5.0 for very
unsatisfactory (see Tables 92 and 93).

The largest cities (over 250,000) are most satisfied with their
contacts with both the regional and central offices  (mean scores
of 2.0 and 2.3 respectively), while the smallest cities (under
50,000) are least satisfied  (means of 2.5 and 2.6 for their region-
al and central office contacts, respectively).  Other pockets
of relative dissatisfaction are Western cities (means of 2.5
and 2.7 for regional and central contacts) and suburban cities
(2.5 and 2.7 for regional and central contacts).

Apparently the degree of satisfaction may be related to the
amount of contact.  Smaller, Western, and suburban cities all report
less contact with EPA offices.  And, satisfaction appears to be un-
related to difficulties complying with federal air and water
standards.  Those with the most dissatisfaction are generally
least likely to acknowledge such difficulties (see Table 112).

County data is not consistent with these findings.  Although
the smallest counties indicate the least satisfaction with their
contacts, the group of next smallest counties are the most
satisfied.  Western counties are the most satisfied in the
nation.  And metropolitan counties indicate higher levels of
satisfaction than do non-metropolitan counties (see Tables 9^ and 95)

Of the nineteen states replying to our survey, only one report
of unsatisfactory interaction with EPA is noted.  Mean level
of satisfaction with central EPA is 2.5,with regional EPA it is
1.9.

The regions used by our study do not conform to EPA's regional
offices and, therefore, an analysis of frequency and evaluation
of contacts with each regional office is not possible at this
time.
                          71

-------
FEDERAL EIS EXPERIENCE

Approximately one-third of the cities  (32%)  indicate they have written
a federal EIS as part of an application for federal funds (see
Table 96).  About one-fifth of the cities (22%) report they
have reviewed such statements as part of the process established
by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969   (see Table 97).
These cities report writing an average of six statements and
reviewing an average of three statements.  The number of statements
reviewed appears to be very low considering that 2933 agency
actions had been the subject of an EIS through May 1972, and
that several cities might be eligible to review any single EIS.
This may  indicate some weakness in the A-95 review process
machinery.

Cities of more  than  100,000 are more  likely to write (66%) and
review (45%) EISs than are smaller cities (29% and 20% for writing
and  reviewing  respectively).  The average number they write and
review also  is  generally higher.  Cities in the Northeast are
least likely to have written an EIS, while the South is most likely.
But, the  review of EISs  is evenly distributed.  Central cities are
most likely  to  have written  (55%) and  reviewed (35%) statements;
and  those who have done so average more statements than have
suburban  and independent cities.

According to the 1972 Report of the President's Council on Environ-
mental Quality   (CEO_)» almost half of  all agency actions resulting
in an EIS have  dealt with  roads.  Flood control represented 14%
and  airports 8%.*  Cities  indicate that 38% of the statements
they have written concern  roads,  15%  flood control, and 29% airports
(see Table 98).  Of  the statements they have  reviewed, 54%
are  for  road projects, 34% flood control, and  23%  airport  (See Table 99)
In other  words, a disproportionately  high number of statements have
involved  airports.   The  cities also  report greater  involvement with
urban renewal  projects than  is  indicated in  the CEQ data.

The  cities  report that outside consultants are frequently  responsible
for writing  the cities'  impact statements  (41% of  the cities
indicated using them).  The  chief executive  is listed as the author
by approximately one-third of the cities (34%)•  There are no
consistent  size relationships, but Southern  cities are most likely to
use  consultants (57%); city  managers  are more  likely to be credited
with writing them  (37%)  than are mayors  (26%(  see  Table  100).
"Council on Environmental Quality,  Environmental Quality,  1972,
 p. 249.                            	 	
                           72

-------
Regarding authorship of locally required EISs, only 14% of local
chief executives were involved significantly as compared with 34%
involvement in preparing EISs for the federal government.  Conversely,
54% of local departments were involved in local report preparation as
compared with 42% involved in the federal statement process.  Additionally,
project developers play a large role in the  local EIS process, while
consultants are more likely to be used in the federal process.

County data generally agree with these findings.  About one-third of the
responding counties have written an average of six EIS; and 37% have
reviewed an average of seven EIS.  Both figures are higher than for
cities (see Tables 101 and 102).  Larger counties are more likely than
smaller counties to have written and reviewed an EIS.  Metropolitan
counties report greater involvement than other counties.  The type of
projects are similar, with the exception of fewer urban renewal projects
(see Tables 103 and 104).  Counties are more likely to use their
departments to prepare impact statements and are less likely to make it
the responsibility of the chief executive (or chief administrative officer)
or to use outside consultants (see Table 105).

When the cities who have participated in the federal EIS process by either
writing or reviewing statements were asked to comment upon the effects
of the EIS process, 30% indicate  there has been no effect.  Somewhat
fewer cities report project improvement as a result of the process--
19% of those who have written statements and 28% of those who have reviewed
them.  Similar proportions report the process "provided" citizen parti-
cipation in the decision making process--17% of the ElS-writing cities
and 26% of the ElS-reviewing cities.  However, a larger number list
effects that may be considered criticisms--45% of ElS-writing cities feel
the process has "consumed extensive staff time" and 45% indicate project
delays (the proportions for ElS-reviewing cities are similar—40% and
43% respectively).  A small proportion (5% of ElS-writing cities and
1% of ElS-reviewing cities)  indicate projects have been "killed" as a
result of the EIS process   (see Tables 106 and 107).

The states see a greater impact for the federal EIS process.  Only \\%
indicate the process has no effect.   Almost three-fourths (72%) report
project improvement, and two-thirds (67%) report citizen participation.
But, complaints are also more frequent, with 7%% noting extensive staff
time and 83% noting delay.  Only ]]% report a project has been killed
as a result of the EIS process.


OTHER ASPECTS OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS

It has already been noted that besides indicating concerned local officials,
cities are most likely to point to state or federal requirements as a
major factor contributing to the development of environmental  management
programs (68%).  In addition 38% credit state or federal financial incentives
as a major factor, and 28% note the importance of enabling legislation.
                                73

-------
The data for the counties Indicate even higher proportions crediting
state or federal requirements (77%) or financial incentives (51%)
as factors contributing to the development of programs.  Counties also
are more likely to mention enabling legislation as a stimulus (46%).

In addition to this interrelationship of the three levels of govern-
ment, approximately 151 of the cities report being the objects of
suits regarding environmental matters in the last two years.  Of
these, one-third (34%) say the state government was the initiator of
the suit.  This represents 5% of all cities responding to our survey.
The federal government is listed as the initiator of the suit by
7% of the cities (see Tables 108 and 109).  The states in the North
Central and Northeast are especially active, with over 40% of the
cities in those regions which are sued naming the state government
as the initiator.  The counties responding to our survey were less
likely to name the state as the initiator of suits even though the
proportion being sued is approximately the same.  No county reports
being the object of a federally-initiated suit (see Tables 110 and
111).

Almost half of the responding cities (48%) indicate having some
difficulty complying with state and/or federal standards for air or
water quality.  Water standards are causing the most problems for
cities.  Large cities generally are more likely to report difficulties,
whether for water or air and whether the state or federal government is
blamed.  Central cities are also more likely than suburban (who are least
likely) and independent cities to report difficulties (see Table 112).
In response to an open-ended question on the problems of municipal chief
executives in dealing with environmental matters the cities most
frequently mentioned complaints about having to meet standards—some-
times changed while they are trying to comply with them—coupled
with not receiving adequate financial assistance.  Counties are even
more likely to list difficulties meeting standards, suggesting county
systems may be even more inadequate (see Table 113).
PROBLEMS OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS

When the cities were given an opportunity to indicate the nature of
the problems they have encountered in their relations with the
state and federal governments concerning environmental matters, two-
thirds (67%) of them listed some complaint.  Counties are only
slightly less likely to complain (59%).  The proportion of cities and
counties listing a problem declines as the size of the governmental
unit declines (e.g., 90% of the cities over 500,000 who respond to
the questionnaire list at least one complaint, compared to 63% of the
cities below 25,000).  Whether this is due to differences in the
quantity of intergovernmental relations, its quality, or the interest
or sophistication of the respondents,  is not clear.  Western cities
and counties are most likely to list a complaint (72% and 76%,
respectively).  Central cities are most likely and suburban cities
least likely to indicate a problem (metropolitan counties are more
likely than non-metropolitan); and local governments using a manager
or administrator generally are more likely to answer this question
than other governments.


                               74

-------
The  results that emerge from both city and county  responses are similar
in terms of complaints against both state and federal governments.  The
problem most frequently cited  is  inadequate funding.  Of the cities
responding to the questionnaire,  40%  listed funding as a complaint against
the  state or federal government.  It  is as likely  to be  leveled against the
federal government  (by 32% of  the cities) as against state governments.
Of those listing any problem with the federal or state governments, the
West and South are  less likely to note funding than are cities  in
the  Northeast and North Central regions.  Suburbs  are least likely to
mention it.  Central cities are most  likely to list it as a complaint
against state governments, but independent cities  are most likely to
list it as a complaint against the federal government (see Tables 114
and  115).

The  second most frequently cited  problem  is uncertainty and delay in
program administration.  This  may be  a function of the fact that concern
with the environment and the development of programs and organizations
to administer them  are recent  phenomena.  It is likely that the un-
certainty will decline as knowledge about the problems and their potential
solutions are increased, and as a clearer statement of goals and
priorities are developed by the polity.  But in the meantime, 35%
of all cities list  it as a problem, with 27% of the cities naming the
federal government, while almost  the  same amount (25%) list the
state government    (see Table  116 for a summary).  Western cities are
most likely to name the states as committing this  problem, but  Southern
cities are most likely to blame the federal government.


The third problem, conflicting or unreal  standards  is  indicated by
3-2% of the cities.  States are slightly more likely to be blamed (23%)
than the federal  government (20%).  This problem,   like the previous
one reflecting uncertainty in program administration, may also clear
up with time.   Nevertheless, a lack of consensus on goals could continue
to contribute to this complaint being made in the  future.  No clear
patterns emerge.   For instance, suburban cities are least likely to
register this complaint against the federal  government,  but most likely
to note it for state governments.   This may reflect the fact that
suburban cities are less likely than other cities   to have contact with
federal  agencies.

Inadequate communication is noted as a problem by  27% of the cities,
with 20% blaming the federal government and 21% citing the state
governments.   Cities in the Northeast are least likely to cite this
problem.  Smaller cities are more likely to cite it as a problem with
state government than do larger cities.

Twenty-seven percent of the cities complained that  local  government
participation in policy-making is  inadequate.   This is more likely to
be attributed to local-state relations (23%)  than  to local-federal
relations (18%).   Whether cities participate more   in federal  than in
state policy-making, or whether fewer expect  to participate in either,
is not  clear.   Southern cities are more likely than others to list  this
                                  75

-------
complaint--ei ther against the federal government or against state
governments.  Non-metropolitan cities are less likely to make this
complaint.  Counci 1 -manager cities are more likely than mayor-council
cities to blame state governments.  But there is no difference in
the proportions attributing the problem to the federal government.

Another point of view of local participation in state policy-making
comes from the states' responses to our questionnaire concerning
local participation in the drafting of state pollution plans (air,
water, solid waste).  They indicate that local participation in
the form of serving on planning committees, or actually drafting
segments of plans occurred more often (7 states) than lesser forms of
participation such as merely reviewing plans or testifying at public
hearings  (6 states) or to have had no involvement at all (4 states).
Data are  incomplete for the other five states responding to our survey.

One-fifth (21%) complain about inadequate technical assistance.
Again, there is a tendency to see this as a greater problem for local -
state relations (18%) than local-federal relations (14%).  And here
too, differences  in expectations may be important.  State officials
are considered a more important source of expertise than federal  officials
--in fact, more than twice as many cities say that state officials have
been a source of expertise in the previous two years than federal
officials have been.  Northeastern cities and central cities are slightly
more likely than other kinds of cities to register this complaint
against the state or federal government.

Overlapping programs is  also seen by approximately one fifth of the
cities as an intergovernmental problem (15% citing the federal govern-
ment and  14% of the states).
Unreasonable enforcement measures is the least mentioned (17%) of
the eight problems to be noted by the cities.  More cities are likely
to blame the state (14%) than the federal government (8%), reflecting
the division of responsibilities between the federal government as the
standard setter and state governments as having the primary responsibility
for enforcing the standards.  The West is least likely to raise enforce-
ment as a problem.

Data for the counties indicate approximately the same pattern, with some
minor differences.  There is a slight tendency for fewer counties to
register a complaint  (see Tables 117 and 118).

At the state level financing is listed as the major problem in their
relations with the federal government — 11 of 19 states responding note
either general complaints or specific references to the problem of the
Presidential impoundment of funds.  Nine of the states are also critical
of federal decision making, commenting on delays, changes, lack of decisions,
or interagency conflicts.  Four states complained about the nature of
federal requirements  (e.g., too little time to respond, or too detailed or
excessive requirements).
                                 76

-------
Intergovernmental relations are affected not only by the local
governments' perceptions of the other levels, but also by how the
states and federal governments perceive local governments.  The
problem most frequently cited by the federal respondents concerning
their relations with local government is a hesitancy on the part of
local governments to make the necessary hard decisions.  They perceive
a tendency for local governments to look to other levels of government
to make the decisions for them.  Some federal respondents attribute
this hesitancy to an inordinate amount of influence that developers
and other special interests have over local governments.  Several also
refer to a lack of expertise available to local  governments.  Also
cited is the fragmentation of responsibility at the local governmental
level.  Finances are mentioned by other respondents—one citing the
local governments' lack of financial resources,  while two others perceive
the local governments as unwilling to fund programs.

The problem most frequently reported by states regarding encounters
with local governments concerning environmental  management deals with
finances—the inability or the reluctance of local governments to
finance needed programs.  Several states also cite jurisdictional
disputes or fragmentation of responsibility between local governments,
in conjunction with charges of provincialism or hesitancy to partici-
pate in regional arrangements.

As in the development of any new intergovernmental program, there will
undoubtedly be problems defining the roles and responsibilities between
levels.  When asked to indicate problems encountered with state
and federal governments, most local governments did spell out some
problems.  The federal government is as likely to be the object of
local complaints as the state government.  The most frequently cited
problem is inadequate financing.  On the other hand, state and federal
respondents are critical of local government hesitancy to act.
                               77

-------
 I.  Problems  in Environmental Management
 Introduction

An understanding of the problems facing local governments in managing
the environment is the focus of this section.  Two questions in the
survey comprise the basic sources of information.  The first is a
closed-ended question:  "What are the major obstacles to environ-
mental management in your municipality?"  The other is an open-ended
question: "What are the most critical problems facing you as chief
executive in dealing with environmental matters?"  The latter question
gives the respondent an opportunity to either reinforce some of his
previous responses, such as complaints about his relations with the
state and federal governments; to reinforce some of his evaluations
of the seriousness of various pollution problems, such as citing
solid waste as one of the "critical problems... in dealing with environ-
mental matters;" or, to indicate some aspects of environmental
management not directly examined in the questionnaire such as
problems of balancing the demands of "special interests" against the
commonly invoked perceptions of "public interest."
OBSTACLES TO ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

A summary of the responses of the city and county officials to the
question "What are the major obstacles to environmental management
in your municipality ?" are included  in Tables 119 and 120.  Clearly,
inadequate finances is perceived as the most important obstacle.
Almost three-fourths of the cities responding to this question cite
inadequate finances as an obstacle.   In every category of cities, this
is the factor cited most frequently.  Counties are almost as concerned
about money—more than two-thirds of  the counties cite it as an obstacle.
The larger counties, however, cite fragmentation of responsibility
between levels of government more frequently, as do counties in the
Northeast, and those with an administrator.  State respondents also
recognize the seriousness of scarce financial resources—95% of
the states cite this factor as an obstacle.  While 69% of the federal
respondents perceive inadequate finances as a serious problem, more of
them (75%) cite fragmentation as a problem.

Besides financial problems, there is  high agreement among respondents
that the fragmentation of responsibility between levels of government
is a serious obstacle to environmental management.  Almost half of
the cities (^9%) cite it, as do 6k% of the counties, 53% of the states, and
75% of the federal respondents.  Although there is much agreement that
the delineation of responsibility between the various  levels of govern-
ment for environmental management is  not clear, it is unlikely that
there would be consensus on how to resolve this problem.  Evidence for
                               78

-------
this latter statement may be seen in the responses to a question
directed to the state and federal officials asking them which unit
of government  (from local through regional to state) "should provide"
a series of environmental management "services," e.g., air pollution
abatement, solid waste disposal.  A large majority of the states
(67% to 88%) feel they should provide, or at least share in the
provision of, services concerning air, noise, and water pollution
abatement.  For the other services (e.g., refuse collection, sewage,
water supply and distribution) a majority of the states indicate
cities should be the provider, except for solid waste disposal in
which counties are cited slightly more frequently than cities.
Federal respondents, on the other hand, prefer an "area-wide or
multi-jurisdictional unit," and give the states a predominant edge
only regarding sewer lines, and the cities only on noise pollution
abatement and refuse collection.

The third major obstacle cited by cities is a lack of expertise.
Thirty-eight percent (38%) of the cities cite this factor.  Counties
are somewhat less concerned, only 26% cite it, thereby placing it in
fourth position (after "insufficient enabling legislation").  The
state respondents also place it as the third most frequently cited with
42%.  The federal respondents place it fourth, although 56% cited it
as an obstacle for local governments.  For the counties, the smaller
ones are more likely to consider it a problem than the larger ones.
There is no relationship between size and citing this factor for the
cities.

Other indications that lack of expertise is a problem for local
governments can be seen in the data on factors contributing to the
development of environmental management programs.  As mentioned earlier,
the data indicate available expertise is the factor least likely
to be mentioned (only 19% of the cities and 27% of the counties cite
it).  In addition, the local governments indicate elsewhere in the
survey that they need additional training even though they have a
variety of expertise available within their staffs.  Only 13% of the
cities and 21% of the counties do not indicate a need for some type of
environmental training (see Tables 121 and 122).  The greatest need
for training comes in the broader areas of "general environment"
(69% of the cities and 70% of the counties indicate a need for additional
training in that area), environmental standards and enforcement (71%
and 60%), and environmental impact statements (56% and 55%).  Less
need is expressed for more applied and technical areas of water (17%
of the cities but 35% of the counties), liquid waste (22% and 32%), and solid
waste (28% and 46%).  This reflects the areas of expertise listed as
available within their staff.  For example, using city data only, 76%
claim available expertise for water quality, 86% for sewerage, and
79% for solid waste in contrast to only 11% for environmental  sciences,
and 26% for environmental management.  Other applied areas do show
gaps, however, with only 16% of the cities indicating available internal
                                  79

-------
expertise on air quality and 21% on noise.  Land use expertise, however,
is indicated as readily available, with 8A% of the cities claiming
such expertise.  Larger cities and central cities generally have
more expertise represented on their staffs (see Table 123).  It is
interesting to note that large and central cities generally are not
less likely to indicate a need for training in a particular area,
despite their higher availability,  (see Table 12A for comparable
county data).

The cities report a wide range of sources to supplement their own
expertise.  The source most frequently cited is state officials (68%).
Consulting firms are the second most frequently cited source (60%).
Other governmental sources include federal officials (32%), COG or
other regional staff (29%), and other local governments (20%).   Environ-
mental groups (26%) and universities (18%) are additional sources.  The
wide range of sources indicates that the limitations of inadequate
staff expertise can be overcome, and the nature of most of the sources
indicates at little financial burden  (see Table 125, which also indicates
that the central cities and the large cities are more likely to be turn-
ing to federal officials than the other cities do). Suburban cities
are least likely of the cities to turn to the federal level, and
are most likely to turn to other local sources such as other cities and
COGs.  Counties also indicate substantial use of state and federal
officials and outside consulting firms (see Table 126).
Inadequate methods to measure problems and an absence of necessary
technology are cited as obstacles to environmental management by 36%
and 28% of the cities, respectively.  For the counties the proportions
are 25% and 22% respectively, and for the state respondents it is 37%
and 21% respectively.  Federal officials are relatively more concerned
about inadequate measures of the problem, as 61%  indicate, making it
their third priority.  Thirty-three percent  (33%) list inadequate
technology as a major obstacle.

A lack of public support is indicated as an obstacle by approximately
one-fifth of the local governments  (21% of the cities and 19% of the
counties).  The proportion of counties listing it is the lowest for
any of the eight obstacles included in the question.  Almost one-third
(32%) of the state officials cite it, as do 39% of the federal res-
pondents.

Insufficient enabling legislation Is mentioned by 19% of the
cities as a major obstacle.  Twice  as many counties  (38%) list it,
reflecting their lack of authority.  For counties, it is the third
most frequently cited obstacle.  State and federal respondents place
it near the end of their list with  21% of the states and 36% of the
federal agencies noting it.
                                80

-------
Fragmentation of responsibility within city or county government is
cited by bk% of the federal respondents (their fifth most frequently
cited obstacle).  The others are far less likely to see it as an
obstacle—22% of the counties cite  it, but only 11% of the cities and
states see it as an obstacle.  For the cities and states it is the
least frequently cited factor.

In summary, inadequate finances and problems of fragmentation of
responsibility between the levels of government are the two most
frequently cited obstacles by city, county, state, and federal respondents
a 1i ke.
CRITICAL PROBLEMS IN DEALING WITH ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

When asked to discuss the problems facing local government chief executives
in environmental management, local officials substantiated much of the
data from earlier closed-ended questions.  The single problem cited more
than any other by the respondents from each of the three levels of govern-
ment deals with inadequate funds and financial resources.  The local govern-
ments often link the problem to the other levels of government, sometimes
referring to federal impounding of funds or complaining about meeting
federal and state standards without adequate financial assistance from
them.  Occasionally, they note their inadequate tax base, and several
local respondents admit a reluctance of their own city councils and
citizens to appropriate the money.

Besides citing various pollution problems (such as water quality or
solid waste) local executives'  complaints involving federal and state
governments are the second most frequently cited category of problems.
Local governments are especially bitter about changing and/or "un-
realistic" standards and guidelines.  These complaints reflect the data
cited earlier in Table 116 which indicates inadequate finances, admin-
istrative uncertainty or delay, and conflicting or unrealistic standards
as the three most frequently reported problems cities have encountered in
their relations with the state and federal governments.  And as in the
earlier data based on closed-ended questions, state governments are as
likely to be pointed out as is the federal government.

Another common problem frequently noted by the local governments (and
occasionally by the federal respondents but not by state officials) is the
need for increased staff expertise.  Sometimes the problem is simply
cited as a need for expertise or knowledge, and sometimes the problem
is stated in terms of a need for additional staff.  This complaint is
frequently tied to financial need by the local governments.

The need for public support is another frequent theme.  Comments about
apathy and public misunderstanding are voiced by respondents from all
three levels of government.
                               81

-------
A number of respondents at all levels of government relate problems
facing the local chief executive In dealing with environmental
matters to the other issues he must face.  The scarcity of resources
necessitates the development of priorities between the environment
and other policy issues, and between the different environmental issues.
Several local governments refer to a conflict between economic develop-
ment or growth and environmental quality, or to other issue conflicts
such as housing versus open-space.  Several local governments mention
the need for cost-benefit analyses or other determinations of "whether
or not environmental concern is worth the social consequences that
will follow it" (to use the words of one respondent).  Sometimes the
local governmental respondent complains about a lack of goals, either
in general terms or specifically related to the environment.

Competition and conflict concerning community goals and priorities
also leads to comments about the conflict between their spokesmen.  A
number of cities comment on the conflict between developers and environ-
mentalists.  The number of local government respondents who single out
developers and "special interests" for criticism are about equal to
the number who single out environmentalists as the object of their
critici sm.

The problem of fragmentation between levels of government is another
problem that is broader than just environmental matters, but is cited
by a number of respondents at all levels.  Sometimes the comment refers
to problems between the local, state and federal governments, but
usually it refers to jurisdictional conflict between units of local
government.  Several cities and counties cite the fact that environ-
mental problems that concern them are out of their jurisdiction--
usual ly they mean another city in the area.  Occasionally, though, their
adverse comments refer to regional authorities.  Other complaints
about a lack of authority for local governments (a relatively common
comment by federal respondents) often refer to the need for additional
enabling  legislation.

The specific environmental problems most frequently cited by the local
governments are in the areas of water quality (especially the problem
of sewage  treatment) and solid waste disposal.  General land use problems
are also  noted relatively frequently.

Although  there   is a wide range of other problems facing the local chief
executive as listed by them as well as by  respondents at the state and
federal levels, the ones discussed above are the most frequent.
SUMMARY

Money to develop programs and hire the experts necessary to administer
them, and the fragmentation of  responsibility between various local
governments and between  local,  state, and federal governments which
complicates and exacerbates intergovernmental relations, are problems
in environmental management  which clearly emerge from the analyses of
the data from open-ended and closed-ended questions answered by local,
state, and federal officials.
                               82

-------
                                         APPENDIX 1
Municipal
\fear
Book
                          Urban
                          Data
                          Service
                             1140
                             Connecticut
                             Avenue
                             Northwest
                             Washington DC
                             20036
         International
         City
         Management
         Association
 Environmental Management
 and Local Government
 Questionnaire  - 1973
                                  Instructions:  In  the following ques-
                                  tions, the term "municipality" refers
                                  to your organization whether county,
                                  city, borough,  town,  township, or
           village; and the term "chief executive"
           is used to mean executives, managers,
           chief administrative officers,  mayors,
           chairmen, or first selectmen.
I.    Definition

 1.  Based on your own feelings, rank the following local issues according to their importance in your community. (Rank
     the items from 1 - 8; 1 = most important, 2 = next most important, etc.  Do not use any number more than once.)
   7-
   8-
   9-
   10-
          . a. Crime
          . b. Education
          . c. Environment
          . d. Housing and urban blight
                                                  11-
                                                  14-
_e. Taxes
. f. Transportation
.g. Welfare
. h. Other (specify)
 2.   Various officials have differing definitions of the term "environment." Which of the following groups of items most
     closely agrees with your own definition of "environment."  (Check one)

  15-	1. Air, noise, sewerage, solid waste, toxic substances, water
     	2. All in response "1" plus energy, historical preservation, land use and open space,
              radiation, population, and wildlife preservation
     	3. All in responses "1" and "2" plus aesthetics, health, housing, mass transportation,
              recreation, streets and highways
     	4. All in responses "1", "2" and "3" plus economic development, education, employment,
              public safety, and welfare

 3.   Rate the severity of the following problems in your municipality.  (Circle one response for each item.)

         No problem   (1)            (2)             (3)            (4)            (5)  Severe problem
16~  a. Aesthetics
i7-  b. Air
18-  c. Growth
"-  d. Land use
20-  e. Noise
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
f.
g-
h.
i.
j-
Radiation
Solid waste
Waste water
Water supply
Other
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
                                                                                      3    4    5    21
                                                                                      345"
                                                                                      345"
                                                                                      3    4    5    24
                                                                                      345"
                                               83

-------
     NOTE:  In the following questions, the term "environment" refers to the categories listed in Question 3.


II.   Organization and Policy
                                                                                              UNDER
 4.  Has your municipality adopted a statement of general                                         CONSID-
     environmental goals or policy?   	  YES (    )   NO  (   )  ERATION  (   )   26

     If "YES," in what year was it adopted?  	  19	27-28

 5.  Does your municipality have a staff committee which meets regularly
     specifically to consider environmental matters?	  YES  (   )   NO  (   )   29

 6.  Does your municipality have an environmental department or agency?  	  YES  (   )   NO  (   )   so

     If "YES,"

     A. Is it separate or a part of another department or agency?


        	  1. Separate

        	2. A part of an agency (Please specify)	
     B. In what year was it established?	   19	32-33

     C. Number of full-time professional and/or technical staff 	   	34-36

     D. What are the department's primary functions? (Check all those applicable.)

     3?-	a. Research                                41-	e.  Environmental impact assessment

     38'	b. Planning                                42~	f.  Program development
     39-	c. Inspection and monitoring                43-	g.  Advisory functions
     40-	d. Enforcement                            44-	h.  Interdepartmental coordination
                                                          4S-	i.  Other (specify)	
 7.  Has your municipality expanded the responsibility of previous existing citizen boards
     or commissions to include environmental problems and issues?	  YES  (   )   NO  (   )   46

     If "YES," which boards and commissions? (Check all applicable.)


     "	a. Park and recreation                            	d. Community development

   48~	b. Planning                                   S'"	e. Other (specify)	
   49-
      	c. Historic preservation                                      	_	
  8.   Has your municipality created a citizen environmental board or
      commission which deals with environmental issues?  	   YES (   )   NO  (   )   "

      If "YES,"

      A. In what year was it created?  	   19	53-54

      B. How many members does it have?  	   	ss-s?

-------
 8.  C. What are its primary functions?  (Check all those applicable.)

     58-	a. Investigate environmental problems         61-	d. Advise the municipality's governing body
     59-	b. Organize community programs             62-	e. Enforce environmental quality standards
     60-	c. Educate the public                        63-	f. Other (specify)	
     D. Is this a specialized citizen environmental board or commission which deals with
        a specific environmental problem (e.g., Air Quality Board)?	  YES  (   )   NO  (    )   64

        If "YES," what topics does it consider? (Check all those applicable.)

     65-	a. Air                                     67-	b. Solid waste
     66-	b. Water                                   68-	c. Other (specify)	
 9.  Has an official in your municipality been designated as having primary
     responsibility for environmental matters?	  YES  (   )   NO  (   )   69

     If "YES,"

     A. Who is that official? (Check one)

     70-
             — 1. The chief executive
        	2. A staff member in the chief executive's office
                   (Specify position: 	)
        	3. Head of environmental department of agency
        	4. Head of another department
                   (Specify department:	)
        	5. Other (specify)	

      B. What are his primary  environmental functions? (Check all those applicable.)

      71-	a. Provide advice on environmental policy
      72-	b. Develop environmental programs
      73-	c. Supervise environmental activities
      74-	d. Carry out operational responsibilities for environmental programs
      75-	e. Other (specify)	
III.  Programs and Activities

10.  In which of the following areas do you feel your municipality's staff has competence? (Check all those applicable.)

  7-  	a. Environmental management                   12-	f. Sewerage
  s-  	b. Environmental sciences                       13-	g. Solid waste
  9-  	c. Air quality                                  14-	h. Water quality
 10-  	d. Land use                                    is-	i. Other (specify)	
 11-  	e. Noise
11.   What type of environment-related training is needed for the management staff of your municipality?
     (Check all those applicable.)

 16-  	a. General environment                         20-	e. Solid waste
 17-  	b. Environment standards and enforcement       21-	f. Water
 is-  	c. Environmental impact statements              22-	g. Other (specify) 	
 19-  	d. Liquid waste                                23-	h. None

12.   Who has provided environmental expertise to your municipality in the past two years outside your own municipality's
     staff?  (Check all those applicable.)

 24-  	a. Other local governments                      28-	e. Consulting firm
 25-  	b. COG or other regional staff                   29-	f. University staff
 26-  	c. State officials                                30-	g. Environmental groups
 27-  	d. Federal officials                             31-	h. Other (specify)	
                                                       85

-------
13.   What are the most important or innovative actions or programs your municipality has undertaken in the last two years
     to improve or safeguard the environment?
14.  Has your municipality adopted a formal requirement for environmental impact statements? (Check one only):

   32-
          	1. on public and private projects?

      	2. on public projects only?

      	3. on private projects only?

      	4. none


      A. If "PUBLIC," which projects are assessed?


        	a.  All public projects

       "	b.  Public projects over a minimum cost (Specify cost:

       "	c.  Other (specify)	
     B. If "PRIVATE," which projects are assessed?  (Check all those applicable.)

     36-
        	a. All private projects

        	b. Private projects over a minimum cost (Specify cost:	)
     38-
        	c. Private projects over a minimum number of units (Specify number: 	)
     39-
        	d. Other (specify)	


     C. If "PUBLIC" and/or "PRIVATE," who writes the statements? (Check all those applicable.)

     40-                                                   43-
        	a. Chief executive's office                      	d. Outside consultant to municipality
     41-                                                   44-
        	b. Environmental department                   	e. Private developer

     42~	c. Other department(s)                         	f. Other (specify)	
      D. If "PUBLIC" and/or "PRIVATE," who reviews the statements? (Check those applicable.)

      46-                                                   49-
        	a. Citizens or citizen groups                     	d.  Administrative staff
      47-                                                   50-
        	b. Municipality's legislative body                	e.  Other (specify)	
      48-
        	c. Chief executive
                                                                                                UNDER
15.   Does your master plan include a conservation                                                  CONSID-

      (environmental) section?	  YES  (    )   NO   (    )   ERATION  (   )   si


16.   Which of the following land use controls have been enacted by your municipality? (Check all those applicable.)


     "	a. Architectural appearance                       	g.  Required installation of public facilities

   "•	b. Flood plain zoning                          59            (e.g., sewers) by developers

   S4'	c. Growth limitations                          ""	h'  Re1ui«d dedication of land for public
   55.                                                                   purposes (e.g., schools, parks) by developers
      	d. Historical preservation                       60.
   55_                                                        	i.  Zoning for protection of natural resources
      	e. Marshland controls                                        or ecoiogicai systems

   ""	f • °Pen sPace zoninB                          61-	j .  Other (specify)	
                                                      86

-------
17.  Which of the following controls have been enacted by your municipality?  (Check all those applicable.)

     "	a. Abandoned vehicle ordinance                    	
   *3"	b. Tree preservation ordinance                    '	
   6 "	c. Erosion control ordinance                       	
   6 '	d. Grading (excavation) ordinance                 "	
   66-           IT    •     j                                71"
                                                       f. Noise ordinance
                                                      g. Restrictions on nonreturnable bottles
                                                      h. Sanitation (refuse) ordinance
                                                       i. Sign ordinance
                                                      j. Other (specify)	
18.  In which of the following areas has your municipality  officially  adopted,  monitored, or enforced environmental
     quality standards?
     Environmental area
                                             Standards
                                              adopted
                                              (Check)
                                                 Regularly
                                                 monitored/
                                                 measured
                                                  (Check)
                         Name of
                        enforcing
                       department
                                 Number of
                                enforcement
                                   staff
     a. Air	     	       -                 	     	
                                                (7)                (8)               (9)               (10-12)
     b. Noise	     	     	     	     	
                                                (13)                (14)               (IS)               (16-18)
     c. Sewerage	     	     	     	.	
                                                (19)                (20)               (21)               (22-24)
     d. Water	     	     	     	     	
                                                (25)                (26)               (27)               (28-30)

19.  Has your municipality sponsored, either by itself or jointly                                      UNDER
     with other governmental bodies, conferences for enforcing                                      CONSID-
     environmental standards?	  YES  (    )  NO   (    )  ERATION  (    )3i

     If "YES," please specify. 	.	.	

20.  Does your municipality have tax incentives or subsidies to                                      UNDER
     stimulate business and industry to develop programs for                                        CONSID-
     improving environmental quality?   	  YES  (    )  NO   (    )  ERATION  (    ) 32

     If "YES," please specify. 	

21.  Does your municipality have a penalty (fine or tax) structure                                    UNDER
     in which business and industry pay for discharging pollutants                                    CONSID-
     directly into the environment?   	  YES  (    )  NO   (    )  ERATION  (    ) 33

     If "YES," please specify.	

22.  Has your municipality imposed a moratorium based on environmental considerations
     in the last two years?   	   YES (    )   NO  (    ) 34

     If "YES,"
     A. What was delayed? (Check all those applicable.)

     35-

     36-
. a. Issuance of building permits
. b. Requests for rezoning
37-

38-~
. c. Water or sewer connections
. d. Other (specify)	
     B. Why was the moratorium imposed? .
     C. How many months was the moratorium in effect9 (If still in effect,
        how long has it been in effect?)	
                                                                                          months
                                                                                             (39-40)
                                                    87

-------
23.  Has your municipality initiated any major legal suit(s) regarding environmental
     matters in the last two years?	  YES  (    )

     If "YES," what was the subject of the suit(s)?	
                                                                                        NO  (    )    4i
24.  Has your municipality been the object of any environmental suit(s)
     in the last two years?   	
                                                                          YES  (   )   NO  (    )    42
     If "YES,"

     A. Who brought the suit(s)?  (Check all those applicable.)
     43-
     44-~
     45-~
. a. Environmental group
. b. Private business
_c. State governments
46-
41-"
. d. Federal government
. e. Other (specify)	
     B. What was the subject of the suit(s)?
25.  What are the major factors contributing to your municipality developing environmental management programs?
     (Check all those applicable.)
   48-
   49-"
   so-~
   51-"
   52-~
.a. Environmental deterioration
. b. Concerned municipal officials
. c. Enabling legislation
_d. Available expertise
_e. State or federal financial
    incentives or assistance
53-
S4-~

S5-"

56-~
. f. Public support
. g. Active environmental or civic groups
. h. State or federal requirements
. i. Other (specify)	
26.   What are the major obstacles to environmental management in your municipality? (Check all those applicable.)
   57-
   58-"
   59-"


   60-
   61-"
. a. Insufficient enabling legislation
.b. Lack of public support
. c. Inadequate methods to measure
    problems
. d. Lack of expertise
. e. Inadequate finances
                                                            62-
64-
65-~
. f. Fragmentation of responsibility
    between levels of government
. g. Fragmentation of responsibility
    within municipality
. h. Absence of necessary technology
. i. Other (specify)	
IV.   Intergovernmental Programs and Activities

27.   Indicate the frequency of contact your municipality has (had) with federal agencies regarding environmental problems.
      (Circle one for each item.)

a Corps of Engineers . . . 	
b. Department of Housing and
Urban Development .
c. Department of Interior . . 	
d Department of Transportation
e Environmental Protection Agency
f. Other rsnecifvl
Very
frequent
... 1
1
1
1
1
	 1
Frequent
2
2
2
2
2
2
Infrequent
3
3
3
3
3
3
Very
infrequent
4
4
4
4
4
4
None
5
5
5
5
5
5

66
67
68
69
70
71

-------
28.   How would you evaluate your municipality's contact with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's central and

      regional offices?  (Circle one for each item.)



a. Central office 	
b. Regional office 	
Very
satis-
factory
	 1
	 1

Satis-
factory
2
2


Neutral
3
3

Unsatis-
factory
4
4
Very
unsatis-
factory
5
5

No
contact
6 72
6 73
29.   Has your municipality participated in the writing of federal

      environmental impact statements?  	     YES  (   )   NO  (    )    74



      If "YES,"



      A. How many statements?	     	75.77



      B. What types of projects did the statements concern?  (Check all those applicable.)



        "	a. Airport                                    "	d. Roads

       8-                                                    11-
        	b. Electric power                               	e. Urban renewal

       9-                                                    12»
        	c. Flood control                               	f. Other (specify)	
      C. Who writes the statements? (Check all those applicable.)


        	a. Chief executive's office                      	d. Outside consultant
      14-                                                    17-
        	b. Environmental department                   	e. Another governmental agency

        	c. Other department(s)                        	f. Other (specify)	
30.   Has your municipality participated in reviewing federal environmental

      impact statements?  	     YES  (   )   NO  (
      A. How many statements?	     	20-22



      B. What types of projects did the statements concern? (Check all those applicable.)


      23-                                                    26-
        	a. Airport                                    	d. Roads

      24-                                                    27-
        	b. Electric power                              	e. Urban renewal

      25-                                                    28-
        	c. Flood control                               	f. Other (specify)	
31.  What major effects, if any, has the federal environmental impact procedure caused in your municipality?

     (Check all those applicable.)


   29-                                                      32-
     	a. Resulted in project improvements             	d. Delayed project(s)


     	b. Provided citizen participation                "	e. "Killed" project(s)


     	c. Consumed extensive staff time               "	f. No effect



32.  With  which  of the  following state  and/or  federal standards is  your municipality having difficulty complying?

     (Check all those applicable.)


   35-                                                      38-
     	a. State air quality                            	d. Federal water quality
   36-                                                      39.
     	b. Federal air quality                           	e. None
   37-
     	c. State water quality





                                                       89

-------
33.  Has your municipality participated in enforcement conferences during the last
     two years sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency?	
                             YES  (    )   NO   (    )
40







34. Which of the following problems have you encountered in your relations with state and federal governments con-
cerning environmental management? (Check those applicable for both federal and state levels.)
State Federal State Federal
(1) (2) (1) (2)
41- _ , 45-
a . Overlapping programs
b. Conflictine or unreal-
istic stai
c. Unreason
ment m
., d. Inadequa
idards
table enforce-
48-
easures _...,„
te local partici-



pation in policy making
35. If you have implemented the following environmental strategies, how effect
securing environmental quality? If you have not used the following environn
effective do you think they would be! (Circle appropriate response.)

a. Environmental agency 	
b Citizen advisory board .
c . Environmental impact
statements . 	
d Land use controls . . .
e . Environmental quality
standards . 	
f. Enforcement conferences ....
g Tax incentives ....
h. Penalty charges 	
i . Moratoriums 	
j . Law suits 	
k. Intergovernmental and
regional arrangements ....
36. What are the most critical problems




Very
effective Effective
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
facing you as chief executive




Neutral
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
in dealing with




e. Inadequa
f. Inadequa
g. Uncertaii
progran
_ h. Inadequa
. i . Other (sj

ite communication
ite technical assistance
aty and delay of
i administration
ite funding
lecify) ,



ive have they been in promoting and
lental strategies, in your opinion, how
Ineffective
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
environmental




Very
ineffective
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
matters?




Don't
know
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6




so
51
52
S3
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
     Please  attach  copies of any environmental reports  or  o;
     Thank you for your assistance!
     Name
dinances where appropriate to the items discussed above.
     Title
                                                         90

-------
CS|
X
PLJ

^

VI
•— 4
h-
i-i
i_j


0,
a

t
a
g *
Ul
z
o.
vt
Ixl
act

L™
r^
o










z
-•
z
CJ
a

•-U
a:

u
h*
f-<
>— «
0


















IS*



*


O

>•
0)
^
1






T
a

t—

•f


m
-H
-H
•-4

CD
(\
01





(/)
UJ
M
1—
i«^
U

j
_J
^

^
O
h-






































1









-
Q.

O
ac
o

z
o
*-«
t—
_J
a.
0
a-
oo
m


^^
«-«


o
r»j











o
o
0
«
o
o
'J^
5
Ul

0
j-
•— (

tn
m
t^







o
o
o
•
0
0
—1
1
o
o
o
ft
0
•n

^.
>n


*v
to
OJ

O
!V
in







o
o
C3
ti
a
*n

1
ci?
o
^
>T


j^
^j
NO


Ul
n
—«






o
o
o
»
in
f%4

1
O
O
0 0
^
u\ O
IN

—t

o



CJ



0









o
o



u



o









o
OIO
o!o
W «
o >n
^4}

1

1

o



u



o













o
o
m
K
rN
O O
CJ
•k


o7


ac
Z

















































z
^}
»— <
o
ai
a

O
!-•
JC
a.
5
a
o
o
m


o^
in
'M

in
o
r»»













H-
vO


c,
-c
•o









_J
J

CD
«
cn

















1—
•JJ
2



















































UJ
a
>•
H-

>.
u.
»— *
tj
v*
O
X
>—
UJ
y:
•Ojf-
^


m
U»
— «


•r
?n















^j

^
O

a.
X.
'X.
a.
0
r^


C7*
r—
JZ
Z
^5
a

i
a.
a

co
X
a
o

o»
(V


tX^
o»i


in
CO











o
z
»-«
t-
-U
UJ
^T|
z
o
1—

CO
•H


ao



«T
>T






t^
2
»-<
K»
UJ
UJ
X

•^
"5
O
K*
Q.
-U

                                                        91

-------
v>
UJ
1— <
l->
z
~^j
o
u




u.
UJ 0

2 CD
UJ Z
CM Z
O
UJ Q.
GO UJ
< C£
*" >-
Z
Q
o










i
iMrf
Q
«c
o
Q.
to
UJ
oc
VJ
UJ
t— 1
K-
2
O
U



















W





•q:




Q
UJ
>
>
Qu
U)



























z:
o

o
u.
»-»
I/J
 t\J
-1
I t! 1
o o o
o




o





o












o




o





o












o




u





o












0 01
00
ojo
«' «i
o1 m| o
7
1
0
vn
*-m!ooooooo;
^
— j
o o o 01 oi o m at
































tx «i»l*i*<*|w'*>aj
3 uj o o o vni o mi  in
0
-4
in
"11

5
























Z
a
to*
O
UJ
•X.
X
^
fO



u
if




f*
04
*"'















%
EX! LU
««. X
•h-
rg



w*
•T




•*>
3D
"•*












_J
—
O tx ct
o a a
uj z z
3
a
,<,
f^



fn
CT)




rvj
IT



















i— •
i/>
jj































































CO
••^
m*
H-
>-


tJ
-|«
m



tr
— i
—4



rn
00
rn

















'_.
j£
rt.\\-
%*
f\J



(U
tn




>o
in
fN















O
H-






























UJj
Z.
1

^
























1—
Z
PO
rn



*o
m




o*
^j
*^







•O
-f



\f
•4}




t~4
in
— i







OL
O
H
0
r~4



r\l
in




y*
^-«
ro









S Q:
01, H. 0

2
ac
UJ
o
u.
Uf

a:
oc
UJ
J.
col H


3 S
t § 	 i
•£. col
<
^y
O
X
H
—i
•"•
z

-------

a
Ol
j^
M
O.
01
a


a
ai
z
M
O.
Ol
a

z" a
5 ai
x. z
Z M
o 2



t_

-I
„
x?
U



•g;
t/) O: •
0 aeia
at





03


>.
_J
a
Ol> «S
OC; O
U CX
x


1/1
•n

s.
o
a:
z
^


•?V


*








Uj

«t
M

to a: t





<* OK u < 01
> 0
z
Ul
• ~
m
i«
Ul O O
_J 01
03 Z Z
< 0 -,
P «»•
Ol
Z 0
ll
UB
Ul
o
£
r; u-
0 0

•
o
z










-J






t—
^


>•
a;

^

— '
-Si 1*
a
cc
10 x
O <


















z

z
t_
(-J
z


••«













a: <
Oi— •
r\
ai



































01
I-*
H
*^
U
-J
_J
^
^*
5
H-



























































0.
0
-4
•H




O
in


in




0
fM
fM





O
fM


fM




O
•>(








oi
« 0
o o
a
1-1
-j
col«n
fM
in




^
m


r<-




^
fM





*^
rg


•^




a>
*•(







o
*
(»»
(N



00
rM


i^
^



oo

*•*




oo



in




o
f



O



fl
»T



^
CO
fO




fO
^


rj>
»-t



(M
*«4






a
fO
^
o



T)
tM


(T)
^O



^
N
r-




^
•^


•0
^



o
CO
fM






,,
n
^^
O
fM


^

fM
r-1


•O
fM
m
,-t



o*
f^


fM
O

o




0



o




a
CJ





o



cj
•^
~*


o
in









o







00

o




o



o




0
o

1



o



Q





o




o



o




0






o



o




0 0
1














O O O O
O Oi O O O O O>
O Ol Oi Oj O, O' O:















































































z
o
o
•^ W >^ M M •* •«
o ol o o1 >n o: m o
OiO
•Jin
O |
m O! mi CM
^7!, ,
•^
1
^U
QC
o
;m u
i «J •-•
m
fM
co
in



m
fM


CO
m



fM
«n
r*




fM
fM


^
vn



*
fM










•O
m
^*
rv
f^
f^
•^ CO
M<


O
fM


m
Q



rr\
fM
f^»




^
«N


00
tf



t\
m







-J
^{
GC
t-
H- Z
IAOI
O O Oi Ol O O' O' O1 fMl i n



vO
o
^w




^J
f\


m



r»
r*



fM
CO
lf\




*&



-1
"H



2
fM












H«















































U O 01
m









































Ol
a.
^M
|_
K

U
|
^.
m
sQ
-0



^
"M



^»
fM -<


-T
«v



p«


03



,0
fM


C^
(_>.
"•*


CO
m



-T
m
<\|; f1*







Z J






a:







SI

OI'O 2
> z
cr o
o o

U.
CJ
a
Ul
a.
Til
%


O
-
*^




r-
fM m


in




tM
03





CO
CM


f*«




in
rg











>j»




o>
1
fM





O



O

l


r-





o
2J
«Z«
Ol
O Ol
ZiX
M,
H- Z
Oli X
O _J OO LU O
U. (_) ' — •
U Z1 3L Z «
X 3 *• JB Ok.

3
O
O'LU
n
93

-------


cj
uu
4E
fcH
U.





*~
I*1

>»j
_ j*. ^
t-J:
 CJ •
UJ U|
a


a
UJ
z
•^
u.
Ul
c


a
r UJ
z z
ui «-<
5 "•
5 UJ
S a
g
Ul
= G
u. u.
0 Z
M
o "•
E -
uZ
o

z ^

0 «
o a
2















a.





UJ







CCi C3»
CO


>,
.J
a:
•
^j
Jt
O
*/i| oc
•*
^


tHI









tnicei .;
UJ <
-1






2

>*
-J
a

<,


S' ^f
Q(
oci







I/T| QC| «
*























z
o
z
M
5
o
a.
OJ
•a:















z



<
-










































oo
1*1


•o
o



o
f\


ir
<*i



^
<\


«-<
•^



CO
*w


f\
f



>y
t-







m


>o
rg



^



sQ




r*
t\


co
—i



•r



«
— i



«o
g?









0
o



o




o



o




o



o




o



w




o










o
o



o




o



o




0



o




o



o




o










o



o




0



o




o



o




o



o




o










00
olo



o




o



0




o



o




0



o




0













0




o



o




o



0




0



o




o










O;
O O O 0; CT
O 0 0 0] O1
M W *i M »
ai o uv Q! ^\ o
p in; r\j' -4 o
till I •I.'?
Ol Ol O C» Ol CM
0!o
O|0
O Of CT
a o J>  in o mi rv o
vrv a vr> *>!] "^ i

1
z
3








































































































z
a
H4
u
uu
m
rg


o
•H



O
m


f\j
T~(



O
fi


•VI
•H



tn
«^


-0




o
sr













"4
Ml 0




a
m



«•*




"»"











«•
<9
QC
H-
a
Qj UJ{
«u i! at
m
IT


O*
<\



in



fi




r.
rv


in
pM



ir
VM


00




in
«r















X
Ot| t-i 1— j h-
O( oc at,1 3
m
fi


•H
rH



a
f*i


o
»H



^.

M



ao
*""















a
(X
H-
ro
-J"


^*
fvl



(J,



in




in
rg


•J-
rH



«1
r\


rn
**



vO
in













O
QC
V-
LU
£

Z
H Jji U
UJ| Zi Z







































































































*-
Z
in
m





t»«
i-4



^.
*N


in
Ml



in
in





m
fn


m
00
Nj>


•T
CM f\|



0*
fM


o
rg



rvj
rg


in
-H



o
•••<


r-4
*^ '



or*
O





a:
o




a
u
u.
u

I
z
o
<
h-

C
X
1 ^"
•z.
r—j
Iz


£
H-
ac, •-»', ~-(
3"
3
3C
\J
Z
^
z

94

-------
                  ! UJ   '  ' f~-
                  U?*   i^1
                  I5'l  'CM

in    —
     >
UJ    Z
                   uio
                     II


                   UJ—j
                   K-  .
                   X  1
                   <^! .1


                   3-71
                tf
                IS
                    I  I
                   d,J
                   ut
                     . 1
                   3i  I
                    L^i

                   UJ J
                   I-
                   X
                   CJJ

                   UJ '
                   UJ •

                   3!
                   a: '
                   p

                   s.
                         <

                        ;5
* GROUP
POPJL^TIGi
co ( o r-j : r-.' r- f^
04
-t
.n
t— i
CM


-
O

0
i-H
-1
m
— <
"O
o
t~t
1)

0
o
.n
O
CM
-H
>J
r-
<•>

2
CJ

-
— t
CO
-H
-o
"O
--J

6
I
0
o
o
o
iQ
-
-0
'O

3
_,

0
-T
1
3
—4
^J
'_?
D
A
•7
1
H
^
'.J
•H
• n
rH
r-4
rn
._,
r-H
M
•r
"T
-J
—4
-H
"N*
'J
J*
•NJ

3
i
-
(N
-.
-U
-4
m
;N
•0
r-
Ji
(N
-\j
1
.1
t^
N
•M
-n
(M
^
O
D
O
n
i
-i
(M
3
M
•n
'A
•N
IT,
•"
fN
n

n
•i
i
n
N
ft
~4
n
CN
•O
N
n
o
N
— t

O
0

o
0
o
o
o
o
o
•J
o
0

o
• J
.H
1
J
3
)
u^
-
o

o
J
0
'-1
0
o
J
J

0
-5
1
.1
j
"

0
CJ
CJ
u
0
o
-J
•J
o

o
N
ul
Q























2:
O
(J
:J
-c
_)
X
1.
•3.
OC
vj>
O
UJ
y>
SO CO o O
CM
f
N
N
\l
rn
-vj
IN
"'
T
.N
m
in
IN
rn
m
OU
-r
N
-r
m
'N

—1
•J-
-N
•O
•"J
-T
N
UJ
H
E-
o
n
N)
—4
i-H
"'
IM
„,
n
—4
•0
r-4
-n
-H
0

r-4
"1
M
-n
-j
c
3
o
T:
|
"1
0
•u
0
•t
,n
IN
r-4
IN
•O
J3
•3
.N
$
-
-N
O
\J
rj
%1
-J
E
O
VI
CM
-4
A
m
'v-
•N
IN
IX)

-O
a
•r
rl
-o
'Nl
•N
CO
.3
r\
.N
5

U


























JJ
a
o
D
jj
r
CO
VD
CM
fl
N
m
M
-4
in
(N
en
•ft
•f
-H
•o
1-4
5
i
^
CENTRAL 14
\O \D
CM
r
'O
•— i
^
N.
»
•J1
O
N
0
O
N
ro
in
-VJ
SUBURBAN 'ji
a
j-
—4
IN
^
'•4
(*>
O
-T
M
— 4
m
0
— t
2
rg
in
—4
PI
CN
-H
"•1
1
1
a.
ut
O
•z
























j:
jj
o
0
u.
O
u>
CM
•n
3
IM
IM
O)
•O
•T
"H
r-
tN
M
IN
>O
CN
•M
TO
a
rj
'M
ft
•M
O
,-'1
•3
CN

O
U
0
•1
or
0
z
O"> SO OD (TV
CM
•n
n
r-l
ru
fl
in
•jj
m
CM
o
-r
-o
-o
.•o
o
n
-T
-n
,N
COUNCIL -MANAGER 7t
CM
•1
•N
«,
m
m
m
o
•n
r-4
fvj
•o
m
•o
,n
CJ
^
M
COMMISSION i
u
IN -r
x\ r*
-3 n
-•4 'M
-n o
•o r\
N
i 	 1
n -n
j\ .y
M
0 0
"M "O
£
O IU
r-Z
at •
D UJ
r
                                                                                                   o
                                                                                                   u
                                                                                                   u
                                                                                                   4J
                                                                                                   a
                                                                                                   8.
I'

-------










LJ
O


UJ
>
<
























v> -^
£ *
-J UJ
CD W
s 3
°- a
_i a-
<
fe £
uj j
i >
O 01
0=  i
z -^
UJ
fc s
0 ,,j
.. _l
£— ~n

a£ cc
y o.
I1J
 'J
z
s i
2 ""
>•
z
3
o
«J




































>•
a.
vj

aC
Oj

JC
UJ
i/1
-i
_)
_J
r>
t/>
~z.
a
HH

Q
<;
a:



u
'Si
»~4
^



u
'j)
j


^;
-J


P
X
O
3





c<
<


U
^-
-U
X
'./i
<





















*


T
U
i

•
O
-£

<*
o
UJ
^
I
u
UJ
:*

_u
i.


fT
<£

'<
o
h-
31
C9
i


a
UJ
1-
31
U>
iii
5


o
UJ
1-
3:
u
Ul
:*

o
UJ
h-
3:
o

UJ
3




a
Ul
3;
o

UJ
2

o
IE
o

3


o
UJ
l_
3;
u
i



0
JJ

•
5

^
<
-J
5£
,
;D
2:

•?
U


_»
^

"i
j
"iZ


J
,£

^
<^.
;j
-»_


*
-C


i*-
-H



tf>
'V

^0
"*

P»
rvj
SJ
1)
,-4


y>
ij
H-
2
3
3
w)

_J
_l
•1

»
<
t—
U
V-




























































































(J>iV£t  'OO
OYO CO

J




f^
-a

A
r\i



•0
.^
UT
>^




-H
"1

^]


r-
1M
J1
:M








°
C2
f>.
";
C2
'A

'U
>
^j



'A



3*
^M

f^.
'NJ



•— 4
T
^
•N


U3
ir,

t>J



ro
^-i

r-
^



•j

i^-
-M




1^
m

r—
i~g



A
rn
^
-J




aj
•N

-D


ua
"M
O
^g





-3
;_3
3
*
^"T
-.A
1

• J
0
•^
iA
<\J



eg


r-



^
m

j^
!A



-n
,-n
jj
n


r-
v,

j-i



r



r-
'\j




(J


o

u






o
o
o
J
J^

1

o
o
•A
f^






3



D


rj




^

_,



o






0


o






o





~>


o




o

o





-J


'-1


o

o






o
o
o
."
•\

1

r^
;J
o
p_






-1



^


o




0

'J



o






o


J






3





o


o




.3

j





'->


•J


O

0






'3
•^
3
T
„<

1

' .
U
J1







'3



J


r_J




•J




^>



^


O




^





0






•J


l_»



O


-ji





O


^




T

0





J


'J


O

j






J
j
C3
A


1

—)
n
-g







0






o


0



o


o





o


o




o

o





o


o


CD

CJ










'"3
A
•b
'N

.£.
^J
T
•^



























































































96
!voi
^

^
^



-1
,-,
0
4-




m
^j

!"


o>
^,
u>
•^i











^
<*
'U
-1-
^
•:





4-



o
•N

LA
•y



sr
.,
u
~r


r-
.-n

^r



.')
r-t

•n



N


0





sf
-n

^
^«



^j
-t
o
,$•




->
M

•T


J
•g

"n


r-
•NJ
.
_n














T
;,





^



0
N

fTl
f*>



IM
m
,,,
-n


-"
-n

i"1)



M
_i


'°


,r
IN

-1
-0




f^-
-0

-n
,-n



-^

.-n
.-
(M

j^
r-4
— (


'Jl
fl
'JO
->


r-
r>

«
^


.M
rH


-^


^
rsl

f—
r-l
r-l



r-
,o

f—
r-H
—4


uA
-n
-0
i~4
-4



*>
rg

LA
1— <

r-
OJ
in
r-4
—1














t-
l




/»



0
*M

n
j'l



Ji
-o
ni
•^


^
^>

^



-n
r-4

•T
-A


D
'N

'*J
'.n




"A
"O

^
-T



3
n
^
j-\




^i
^J

-T
A


m
Nj
-0
I>










~?
^_
H-

"^-
,•*
_
4~



























































































O vO ''-O












































































^
13
^~
^
u
^
O
_o

X
^
£.
•e_
,_
i.

CO CO CO
. -1 .
(S eg eg


O



O
tM

rO
iA



.n
rn
,,,
m


M)
„,

XI



iTl
_,


Ul


_,


l\J
^^




^r
n^

in
•j^



rvj
m
n
TV




TV
M

•Tl


*O
pg
^T
iA



O£
O
^


jf f^.
H


0
C-J

r-
MJ



LA
'*)
JU
y


r-
,,

-u



M
r-1


10


-r


•JD
O




f-
.-o

^
•0



•.'
M
r-
^u




P-
:M

S


TV
•M
0
•O







J
-n

JO
>T



^
-
-^


r-
ni

u v



fl
_<


^


"i


j->





^
^

3
•~~v



rfl
T
0
4-




-•
M

?


IK
-M
0)
-r




S 0
1- 1-
wfl ^
;3 £
— to
Q ""
^

t—
D
J
h-
r— t
-f

Z
~
Q


.
f—
,-*
X


^
-
v

—






t














































































































































































































































vt
S
c
o
tn
>
u
5
t
tn
c
9
i
c
t_
**—
•o
«>
*J
n
c
fl
u

c
If


4
II
1_
«
^
•K





-------

1

t>
u

oe
*-*
z
UJ
UJ
J2 z
!£ a
o
< a:
*— *""*
z ^
tt



u
u.
A;
Q —
LU1
aci>—
o;-» O
3C LU
2;
0
a:
>
z
» UJ
'** LL. **•
Ul O Q
i
CO Ul •
HZ °

i
o
O.
£
"™
O
Ul
z
-
H™
™~







 X






o
z
1-4
!K-

























ae









•
o
z










—
 r^
,— ( j lf^ ~4
\ \

!~"i

^'
rvi

!
i ; j
!
j
ott|


m
irv
1 |

^1

ri ; i

!
1

1


•-V
OQ'
O
-"*:






03



i
! ;

1
1


I
[
j
i/v









-U: Q.


>—i "D
H~, ' O
'-'l

! 0


!*>




„,
I
3 1 »
(y  i r^
(Nj — 1 — 4 — )



r>-
Vs: "<1
— 1 r-l' J>



_,






10103
M rvj ,T),.M

C>J








O





o



o




*n o
rol

—i
C>
fV4





CO
P-
in










o

o







o












o
c> oio o o'o
O O.OlO OiO
o^o o oi^>!o
O inl o; IA rsj
_T Z » *O fNi "4-
_)' O 0
1 M i t t

1— 1

i 1
|m o vn ;\j — «
u; oio
t-j Q.

!\J

••H
I







t\,'icj



2;
3





















































































^
O
>«•
p
a:

u>


vn
•H


O
f^



ro
*M

-t


00
•^



cr>
t\i














J
a
H»
z
ai
L^

X

CC.
a
z



r«-
r-4


in
*



(V
m

-.n
(U






r»
-0
OJ



















I

5
O
V)



v+
r-»


CO
CM



^
J



































































^
Ull
as
J..




































at
a.
i-

>•
^
^•4
U
>^

•x
H-
a*
£


•-<
•N


O
•*•



^
rv

O
in






r^
<7*
1-1

















_J

at

r**
LU
u



—4
^4


^
«



^O
<*1

-0
SJ
f<





m
r—
m
















r«
— <


c*>
in



ao
rg

CP
a?






-O
—4
fl













t-
Z
01
O
ZZ
< 01
Q.

CO CJ
3
t/)

ja
1—4




















































































»«
Z
UJ
Z
z
LU
>
a
0

u.
UJ

•r
•X.
U
a.


00
f-t


o»
>*•



CO
fNJ

•*•
f*»






m
>o
CM












-J
O
•£
3
Q
U

IX.



»4


U
U



^
m

o
UA
IN





in
in
(*•










a:
UJ
O
Z
4
£
1
f
<-•
u


u

—»

-r







o
m















Z
o
IMl
CO
oo
••^

z
o
u



•T



!-<




CO
"1

u«







-•
i—
Ol
01
£


f
U
H-




-------












*"N
£
!ai
II
in

i-
2
V*»
O
ex
ac
*H
to
u
Hi
'•^
C/l »„
Ul
10

oo u
0
Ul -J
oo o
rjf£ 1.1
H »^
ac
i
^
o





X
u
X
^™
o
u,
j^
<
-J
u
x
1
S
d.
•/)
^:
•j£
*""

i/)
JJ
v-


•u
X
•x
,1
X

^~
^~
tj
^
-U

U)
•-"
<
o
o
1'JJ


z:
ac:
o
















5
»— I
I—
"*








X
•-4
OJ



















2*
<
JJ
X



*
JJ
£



*
Z
JJ
S


^

U
•s.

*

^
JJ


*

<^
-J.
u


*
2
JJ
g.



=*
2
LU
x




















































t
CM

.u
'VJ
M

"0

co
M


XT
CO
A|
c*>
o


M

O


r»
•>!
rH
H


0
t
-o
r


u>
:M

-T
JJ


-H
m
"j
CO

.u
»-H
_J
t—
I—
















a.
J
3
)—
_j
OL
a.
o
^
m
m

"
O
r<1
s
•3
o
1
J
J
CJ
19
U
in
o
vr
•r
^
ro
m
rH
t
•M
M
0>
AJ
£
o
-o
N
O
"O
rH
•M
O
ro
"M
-M
0
O
0
"3
O
'M
CM
M
rH
JO
•o
rH

"O
*ta
m
•3-
CM
-O
CJN
N
I
Cf
-M
in
M
CM
J'
O
ro
•o
r>
o
u
--i
i
o
o
o
«
0

o
0

0

o

o
o

o
a

o
u

o
o

0
0
o
rH
1
•J
0
•n
o
o
0

o
o

o

0

0
o

o
o


,0

-J
o

o
C3
O
1
•J
"M
U
-
O

0
^

o

o

-1
-,

o
o

'
J

J
a


r J
                 u-1
                                      O
                                      o cn
                                      0
                                             •r

                                             -rfn
98

-------


5E
a
1-4
1-
a.
o
a
**

i—
u

UJ
^_ ;>
0 <
^J "^
o
a.
_ j
^
r™
£ UJ
z >
o <
* X
UJ Z
1 iii
••• ULI
03
£ 0
r~ vj
K U,
z o
UJ
^£ 4
!- O
< z
«/>
£
U













1
z
z
a
O!"— <
lj

OC
JJ
a

»•
o^
0






to
UJ
«
£
u

_/
_J
^

•N
J

t-
o
1-



















































































a
^
o
o

z
a
•>•«
V-


a.
a
o.

o
cw


(M




O


m





o
in


in





o
r>4











O
o

I

"M f"»JCO
oj|



SO
-T <•


rg






in
•o





•o
>-4



O
rw


m





o»
r^«
fM







O
O
o c? o o

•^
(M


•-4
>^
F^


a
•o

o
in
f>



-o
— i


•r
V





-n

o



o




0


o





o



o





o
09 1
in







O
o








o
o
\
o!o



0




^i
m 
O
o o o o
O OiOlO
O O 0
uYo;m
CM
^
•
m
CM


1

1
O 0



o




o


o





o



0





a












rj
O
•r>
1
«>

o o o;
Ojoia^iac
o
f^

m


CM


a
Z



























































































ZT
o

UJ
cc

o
«<
X
a.
**
o
a
UJ
o

o>
OJ



ys

0
<«4j rs^





05
rsl


!Nj CT* ^4" ^
l^-jm IA



«-*
•&

^4
in
^H



o
—i


•0
rg





y%
^
CM












(—



r**
o

^M
^4



m
-0


o
rgii-4



in
r^


r-





co



!*•
-*4


£





r-



in
cn

C3
cr>




i^
(T)


5





0* 50
r-1 •<> in
n









_J
ac
^
^T
I/) UJ
C(
UJ
^
cx
0
2
U

^
CN4
















I
oc b
o a

1/7
rg

















m
at





























































































UJ
a.


>.
^_
tv*
VJ
X
ac
K
UJ
Z
Jr~

CS)


f«4
•4*



m
m

— i
o
,-4



0
pg


o
UA





CM
Q\
•^














i
«I
X
z
JJ
u
CM


>o
tn
»-^


m

(?«
»«4


0
-0



p.
tn o

o
o
i*>



O
*NJ


^
r-4





m
,— i
n














z
<
oc
DC
OC
IN
re,










H-
2*
•JJ
a
2;
UJ
CL
Ml
a

f

























































































^_
^r
UJ
X
z
UJ
^P
a


u.
u
3C
ac
u?
u.

p»






m
r*»
CM









-J
,_,
"r
3
O

•1
CX

H




cn
m
•"*







2C
>JJ
O
2T
*^t
^
1
^
•-X
U
jr
<«.
Z)
o
w



-H
•O

J
^J




_,
_t
t—
UJ
til


z

0
1—

a.
UJ
ac
99

-------
      5
      £
      S
CO
<
tA
                                          •J
                                          -J
                                                O
                                    O
                                    o
                                    IA
                                 CL

                                 a
                                                .N
                           .1
                             •j
                           O  J
                                            -o
                                            rv|
                                                                            o
-3
n
                                                                                                         .n
                                                                                                         -r
                                                                                  ii
                                                                                  u
                                                  •u
                                                  -5
                                                                                        
-------
m


z
U
»«*
f-
0.
1
z
CJ
£
U
b*«
OjH.

QJ
_u
a;. "3
• **"
o ^
— •« iij
Q. ••"'
UJ H> i O ; 
>y


^»
CO




r-
r\j


•J3
"T





rvj































r-
"*'•







1/1
UJ
*H
1—
Z
g
(_)

_J
^

^

H-
CJ
H-


































































Q.

CO
m


CP



m
H


^
m


^
m




c?
ni o in
>n; rv' ~*i
III!
0 O 0 0
f\J ^

1
o

o
1°
!sn
t
^
o;o o o o o o
o o o o o o rfv ac
a Q o m;o m
ck > in o in rsJ!-«
O
a
o

(N -<,
1








Z


3





























































































•z
o

o
^


00
(M


<— 1
i»4


in
•T


CO





oo
OJ


— t
r4





0
*r

















O
"1


^
~4


U
in


ro
•M




o
t\


O*






"O
•r













-»
(X.
l~.
O H» Z
X
«x
OL *>l





«X| J.
jr i ,,

p-
^4


^»



^
>*J


ro
m




f\»
fN


rsi
~4





*T
in

















ol

^

•£

m
rxj


CO



^
fn


o





-f




















« -
-*• f* * — i — i * —
o tr ac 31 v/>





















































C3 CJ Ui O LUi
•JJ
O
Z

^e

UO| JC
1
















































to
=>
>—
h-
(/)

a:
t—
UJ
^

m
OJ


O»
rg


co
^


>O





r~
j"
»-<





in
in
















O
QC
'JJ
£
Z
ub' CJ
jr

^;


































































































i—
Z
Ml
2
g
LU
>
0
0
Uu
•J
a;
nc
u
U,

o
(V


_l
i—(


1-1
m


co
CJ




o^

-------


















a
Ul
t
o
a
z
Ul

to
fsl
"~ '<
Uf l~>
oa ui
< £
H- Z ^
o _.
of
Z
Ul
z
o
o
cc
Ul



UJ
X
















«
0

,,
2:
»-*
.Y
2

u>
1— 1
D
u


o
^
•yr
™_.
3


O
1—
xn
rH



•_
f—

£
i


£1

3
a.
1:1
il
a.
















r-
*""4




X-






s
rH




^
rH
I—
s
t-















K
^
.2.
CD

•»


t
~-

'*
.
U)
„


"r


r
*£

TO


J
«^

JJ


iX

(J
•*=•
CD

£•¥

2
-

13










































































"
•r

UO
'.N

01
••H

0
rg
0>


ro
rH

^O





s

*



•T



-M


0


'J

•41
•>r


iO
i;
^
-^
^
_—
^J


„
<
K—
'—
H










































































































§
•n
^

•—
^_
<•
—
™
2.
Q
a.
•-H
rHJ

^
^

NJ




o


j.
"M

-J





*

rH



-T
»-•


-H


rj


*•"*

^







-5

-
'T>

i
.L

1^

O
O

^J
tNJ

^


M
M
M


^
r~4

-t





5

-I



O



'J


o


0

^





^
~1
~
n
J,
^_>
O
»
•~
•^
>,

aJ
f >

•T
-M

•^


0>
^
in


0


-j





-o

-o



-u



-4


o


o

^
-^




3

""^
--
1
o
•_

r_
r-
rH

0
-

»
•"

-11


^
rH
N


-1
'M

-,,





^

M



l_>



J


O


°

r<1
•-1




•=
1
->
t— (
1
-.3
13
*
~
•n


o
-

(_,


\M>


O

0


-J


'J





~>

o



CJ



'J


o


^-*

^





J
,-*
n

t
o
_J
«,
»n
,*\


^
J

0


(sj




3


•J


,,





3

D



•-J



'-1


0


J

O





•->
•-1
--.

1
"D
O
•
O
rH


O
o

o


k«^


^

o


-3


a





o

3



0



'.j


o


'J

o





"J
'J
^

1
C2
1_

;/



O
o

0


o


0

o


0


o





D

O



SJ



J


"


tj

^^





-
O


i
o

V
fN



J
o

0


i^j




O


O


J





^

o



o



J


o


J

o







10
t"\
»

;i
-*J
C2
t£
—










































































































,^
^
c^
OJ
\_J
^
2
«-l
J-
(^
_
u
'5
c^
rH

00
-4

r\i


-.a
rH
^


^


-H





N

n



V*



~4


0


'J


rH







W.
^J
V
X
,_
±.
^
.s

rH
rH
— (

rH
*-•

rH



~o
m


i-H
~^

rH





51

CNJ



rH
r-


rH


IJ


J

^






_|
"f
•£,


X
1—
ȣ.
<_
^

OJ
-

o


vj


in
C\J
CO


_
*H

•-J





5

•r



o



j


'j


0

r\l
•H










X
r—
^
^_
'7-

^
-

fH
f*.

u
•H



rH


-T
rH

•M





O

O



0



J


0


*"•

•-r
r-1











^»
•S
i
^













































































































•s
V—
h-
'/"

^_
_/
•i—

*
r^
-T

CNJ
-M

^


N
M
r~


y,


m





^J

!*•



fr'



•H


O


'J


m










Lj
^i
r—
1.
2.

J
O

m
-r

*0


y
— <
•N


rH
"SJ

n





— t

M



>*•



1-4


(j
i

0

^
•"<







•^
r—
J.
2.

^
U
j£










































































































r—
i.
^
"
'_,
J
a.
^

^.
i^
Ul
LL
vO
-

HI
•H

N



^
>j


.T.
«H

n





-r

f*-



<->



-j


^3


^

U
-1

cc
c
<
I-
r


-T
«-H

n





2

N



m



1-1


0


— *


-,\



.c
H
c
1-
cr
^
2
3
C
•a


i
^~
**4
s

•M
"X

_
"*

rH


r(>
'*
1


O


o





0

3



rH
(—


«H


=^J


O

^










j
^

•^
^


102

-------
 O  (U
ZZ *"^

 in  
 O   m-3- rn
                                   OO -3"  CM OO
                                   •— CM  CM —
                                                                                            vO LAvO
   r^ LA in
   CM m r-«.
   — -3- CM
                                                                                                             .3- oo o-\
                                                                                oo r-. CM
                                                                                -  O
 fO  C
Q. <
                                                o \o LA o r^-
                                                r<-l LA CA CM —
                                   o o
                                   — CM  CM -a-
                                                          CM -a- CM LA
                                                          — — — CM
                                   o vo  CM tn
                                   m-a*
                                                      -a-  r*. o
                                                      CM  •— —
   in r*. —
   -*  cr\ m
                                                                                                             LA\O
                                                                                o CM
                                                                                -a- CM
"     *
      UJ
      21
      z
      O
      DC
      LU
CO
<
3:
 fO
 u
 m
 Q.
 oo
   — -a-
                                                                                                             CM vO LA
                                                                                                             — vo rn
                             01

                          1_  .—
                          (I)  -M
                         -Q  U
                          E  O
                          1  Q.
                         Z  (U
o        ooor-cMorn       IAOOVO-—
on        — — tA-a- oo oo        -a- — \o vo
o                 — CM LA       cMmcMCM
                                                                             cr»oo—
                                       U)
                                       (U
                                             Q.
                                             3
                                             O
                                             u <
                                             13
                                   O O O  O O
                                   O O O  O O
                                   O O O  O O
                                       03
                                O O O O  O UA
                                O O LA O  LA CM
                             C  •> LA CM —
                             O O  I   I   I   I   I
                            — o o o o  o o
                             ^ LA O O O  O O
                             fO    O O O  O O

                             3 D o o o  LA o
                             Q. > LA O LA  CM —
                             O O CM —
                            Q_
                                01    —
                                0)     eo
                                a:     s-

                                u +J  c
                                                                      -C
                                                                       Q.
                                                                       (0
                                   0) O
                                   (1)
                                   -c x: x:
                                                                       01 l-
                                                                       o  o
                                                                       (U Z
                                       L.  3
                                       o  o
                                      •z. co
 in
 3
 w
 eo
 4J •—
CO  ID
    m
   o
                                                                       c
                                                                       (U
                                                                    C TJ
                                                                    eo  C
                                                                   _Q  (U
                                                                    i-  a.
                                                                    3  0)
                                                                   X* "O
                                                                    3  C
                                                                   CO —
                                                                                B
                                                                                c
                                                                                u
                                                                                at

                                                                                o
    * 3  J^
                                                                                    (0  O  -u
                                                                                   zoo
                                                                                                                    D
                                                                103

-------

H
a
iu
a
a
u.
" -
h 2
E *"

5 ^
o ^
0 I
<
-r* z
•— UJ

LU Z U.
_i o o
ea oe a
H- > •
z a
UJ Z
u.
u.
to

H
o






u.
u.
VE STA
ku **
»— !•*
il


^ O* Of
X
LU
UJ
*-
3T
3^
O
0




















0








o
*y
M
t—
'£.
^

"

t
0
z




*•»

CL
aj
CC





















































J
865 	 8


0
o<
^





OK
tM




•O
m
0






CO















a
t~
u
3

•
^
o
i-






























a.
O
0
vO


o
"*"
•*•






o










^~»
cr«
in
0


-4
^
p.






t**
(M
r-
>r


03
TM






00)
f>.
tM







O 0
a o
IM
CO
•f


03
~*
^
O
•^




rn
t
o 0,0
o


o

o






o
0


o

o






-


o

c,






o o
TO!
in




























O 0 CJ
o o a
0 O O O[O O 0
of o! o o a; o uv o in; a
z
a
o • o, in o
•i mi «Mi -4
o! 1 1 i i
o o oio
1
O
















































2J
f-
CO
r-4


m
fNJ
,n
^ 0
co
cr
vn
rg


y.
1-1
y,
uii m





^





03
Pi


C,
^
r-
fM





*a«
o»
«
ao


^
rn
o
UJ





a
•T —<; o! -O
rx! f r cv; INJ







O
**-<;
wl
UJi









_J









a
(M <-t O ! 1—
i ! . m i o1 H- 2
1 II* »-< 00 4J
o o o oj, X;
*^H
^
s


ro
T





C^
•O,r»
J


•f
rg
c-
rn
— t




u*
coir-
*^i tn





















CO


rr,
"*
-H
^J*





CO
r>4
rn









H-


























ai
0
^> ,!-,
in
o
(M


^
1
1-4




o»l m

rsj








•J
r-







a:
ai
00


V
.-4
0






IN
r<1










•n


m
>o
in






co







\j>
z
£
LU
UJ
3 X
O • — UU- 3E
!_> _j 1/1 ai a
•| •-«. to, x t—

%J <» 2L «w v
^•' Z3 *^i 3«' Ct
£
u o a
"IT
'-U
*
104

-------
   ki

   UJ
   UJ
   CUi'OJ
                 UJ £.
     o


     <
-   s
U.
u,
u
< Ulj«/>  .
   O -T
                                                I
                                                                                                  rv
                                                                                                    ro
                                                105

-------



























1—
Z
£
l~
^
Ok.
1U
O
J
^
£
x
§
a:
•—
3*
Z
Ui
VD —
111 UJ
s li

o-
UJ

U-
I/I
o.
y
^
**"
g
-
a.



a
t-
tt
0.
i/






of
0.
UJ
Q
^
LU

Z
HH

^
fy*
t/i

>
Q

3C
^

O
n
r>/
a.




c£

>


oj

r
o

z
ta*
o
a:
o
o
u



00


















z

u


Q.




O

UJJ
>l
UJ
Q

(/}
LO
UJ
«






^
QL
UJ Z


1
ENFORCE




( J* ^*
z
"*











*-

u
z
z
z
_l
0.

1
UJ
UJ
ee.

a!








M


W






























































^— (
 a 2




































(7*



r-

-D
fO


QK
N




j*


lo m f^'r-'o so o.o]o'


















&
in

rH



•*'


UN
ro







rH1
1
cv1
(A!


T^
*
O



<7>

r»
*
















i
•n


0
CC




U
,-H
H
C
_l
_
*
t—
a
*-













































































a.


0

o
o
O f*) 'Oh- IA


N







N









rH O <^, rH










-t N








o'fOim'^ in'm
o mi ro * m

(O rH




r-
j>
N


f>H
10
(M



r-
^

N



rg



ro






o




r»
•o
(M


f«-
•O
CM



N
-O

01



r-
•o
PO



ro





r4




^
CM


f«.
•0
N



r-
•o

N



5
N



ro





ro



o





o


f~ rH IM O




*



ro in
CO


0>


rH







CO O
I


o


^ tfV •£ O
 o a- o

o



o
o



o




o


o



o





o


o




o
0


o

0



o

o



o
o



o




ff, a*

O



o





0


o


o

































: 1

, o* o^ o o 0*1

O O' O Or O 0\ »i*
O' OI J" 0\ * rg
z1 •.rn-iM'
o o i ii I i i
H Q O! O O O O
H m: Oj at ra o t->
«j J o| oj o o, o
a ijj o, o o
ill >i ml c* m
a°ni
in
ry
O
H
i
o
o
0
Q
o
in
UVIM
1
0
o
in
•>
(M
C-
UJ













1

















































_^

-.v 1 _.
rn 1-4.1-1



0

*
ffl -*-'U>




O^ i ^ h«







1






i
CJ O t*-


i ;
CO -O O
»-*i ! f-*




Ola,i





















4 in'iA, *c'


00
rH




^>
in

in
rH



rH
IM
•0


^
IA
IA



-O



j

N-'UYQ^
^ !


'








oo1 o -3
w^ ro -^
i t
r+ ff) sO
-1


















1


0*0^0 j
rH


*

•a





CM C5 -.0,
h- N ^





rH P*' -0
N










in' o 'NJ
in' ft -o

ajso in co
rH


o
in
o
rH


CO
•o
m
,>


-0





















m ^o
ro ^.o
rH CM


CO
•O

CM
rH


CO

CM




rH
*

gs
rH



N
m
*
CM


O
r»
fM
ro


O
in

ro
CM



<" — ' o, ar
u.


o





o


o




o
o


0

o



o

0



o
o



o







i
o o
U10


o
in


1-4






rH


O
O,
rH

rH





O 0
o

N




O
in
rH


O
0
rH
N



O
O
rH
M



O
O
M



N






IB
UJ
UJ
r
r-

0




0
o
rH


O
0
rH
rH



O
0
rH
rH



0
o



rH



IS
rH
>—
UJ
Uj
a:
^
o
*~
Q.
IJJ
oc
106

-------


















v





CC
a.
Q
cc


CC
Ul
I
O

Z
o
CC
UliO
£P
z
~

£

>
Q

JC
u


H














CJ(
I

a.
CC _l
u i<3 uj
5 !° >
CD
<
oc
Ul

o

o
H
1
S
a.

te.
O.
cc






CC IU
a.




_
0

$
Ul





4
^,1


70.
Ul X
M

1


Ul
0
o z
U. Ul
z
UJ

co
u
Ul
z
13









Z
O
H-
a. »
l/l Z
•1












X


O
1-
z
«t
a.
I
u
Ul
UJ
oc

J_












M

*

„













•cj


rH
•H
•0
m

f—
171

rH
•O
m






















































o.
*"*
*


UY

p-
0"»



O







•*:

n,
O;



m
•0

ro
r-4
"*
^
>0

v^












-4
1


•o!
•o



UJ
»*

o
4-
s


CO
zu;<
_*• ~r. 	 ..
> ~* iju1 ~
3









u.
o









<

































Ul












u/
3
*^
t>
j
I
IQIAU_AC




































i
o a in i -n . (M >3


o

r-
•a

CM


CO
1M -4]

CM

O
CO

CO


o

rO

us
in


-

c\J
r-

i>4 *-4
-J

in

^4f-


p-

o
CO
CM

0

r-
»-4'r-4

0

o
•O f- -O >O


CM.f~




CO




o


-I

CO
in

in
N

,•*

CM o o*;p-
r-4



CM'CsJ



in o>


r-l











O O
o in
r-4|
CO
!

























a.
n

o
in


o
o in
f-4
CO




r-
•o

AJ


>0
fM


CO







a?o

in




o
in




o
in
in


o





0

0
i-l CM






O CM
>£ir**

CM
r-4

O
vO


*H



O
N



CO
•o in


CD!J-
CM



CO
CO



CO
-0 J3

rj
CM CO

0
r-






in
J
CM



Q
-4


o>






CM
~fl

CT>
CM



CO
-o

^J
IO


5
CM
CM


r-





CJ*i f^ C^

o
^>

—4
•o

0
co



^
•0

*


~4
CO
o
N


O





(7»
O (^ Cf*\ & &
.„«...
Of O! O o> O> o> *
oi o -t o>
zi 4 in a| o; o
^ O O! O
3 Uli C5J O1 0
eu >| inj o in
*

25_,000-
CM

1
O
o
o
•
"*
', 1


o

o


o


o

o


o



o

o


o


o

o


o


o o




o




o


o




o

o




o


o


o


o




o


o


o
Q


o





o*

0


0


o




o


o


o
o


o





o*
CM CT1
fk ••
Q»


-OCO'S
J.


2,500-


0

o


o


o













0


o


o




o


o




o


o


0


o




o





a
o


o








0
0
m
•N
ff.
UJ
a




















































































































z

13
UJ
cc

o
GEOGRAPHI
rOO»./>


M

O
•O

CO
•H

CO
•0
o
^•4

O
•a

CO
,»|



^_
^"

^.
•-t



CO
•o

o
-4

m
•o

c^
—i



b-
in

^


^-
N
CO


O
m










t-
\ORTHEAS


*

rO
%t

O

i

CM

0<
*

CO
in
CO





f t ,ffi


>n m



rH


m



CM —1 CO



CO



^



CM



N <*

co








CM H .in



CM


m
CO


•o

,^4
W)



Ch
in

N


"i
m
m


5






_,
<^
iy
h.
^
UJ
U
T
^
CC
O
;»



m


o
CM

'M
r-


rvi




in

^


t
•t


^
CO











SJJTrt



CO




•o

^


^*!

CO
in

CO
CO




co

in


in
co


m
•o











5































































































Ul
a

y,.

V
^ETRO/CIT
m
w4

-0

^
0

fj%
CM

N

CO
CM

m


CO
CO



co
m -O


CO

0
m

N
m

0


CM

in
CO

(-1
1-1

in
"V*
t-!o
in CM

r^

CO
in ^


f7* 'in
•* H



*



CO

























in 

r^



-4
^-

•^JCM
•/>

CO


N

in


•H'O
^



CO
f"

r»


CO
f»
CO


5









CM



in
in

_,


CM
CO
o
—4


Z








^
T
"* Ul
_ SUBURBAN
INOEPENO







































































































1-
z
Ul
X
Q/
UJ
^»
a
«
fe
X
o
u.
CO


CO

in


-0
CM

m
*Q
•0
r— a


aj

co
in

in
•a

CO

„,
f\JfP**

O


CO
CM



CO
m

CO
CM



m
-a

•a
CM

CO
in

co
CM



o


CO
N


3
00
f-4


°






_j
^(
o
^f
-»
MAYOR-CO

^


o

o
in

CO


^
olo


o

0
in

-i


0
%0;0
-t'cM





o
«'o

(M


N
•0
CM


(-
-O:

CM




0 0
•o |CO in o j

4.
Sj



•o
*o

o
CO

sO

CM




f.

„,




o
^
CO




p-
•^im [>o

j.


p-
-oj>o

r4
CO



-O
•0

CO


CO
co


CM





Of
Ul
13

5

5C
COUNCIL-

^>




o
in

CO


f-
-


~°









•y

•H'lMj


O
in

-i




o
m




o
in
-


N







13

H-4
n:i-
COM.«1ISSI
UJ
O


f~
-o

CM




N
V)

CM


^-
•o
CM


CO



o
•^
**
UJ
'-U
IT

z
•r
a
t—
a.
Ul
cc
107

-------




















a
LL)
X
_•
_l
<
^-

i,l

z
lie
t- <£
O- t-«4
a.
CO ** i
r- O
UJ -1
_1 
Z
1,1
UJ
£
o

0£
UJ



1
<*
fr"4
Jfc
Z
jUJ

to
2
















j
^
!-•
i


o
j;
^
i


j
^
X
~J
a

D
^
T£
o
3


a

Ji
0
vT1
"H


_l

t— 1
A
7>
r-t
O
—

r<
I_J

3£
a.


_j

,_
z
.a
3E
CJ

















f<>
f—
1-1



4*
\f*
r-4



i~
7*
r«



O
;JN
r-4





o>
-D
7>
r-l




.*•
Q
:>
M



O
u>

r-t

_
^
JJ

pj.
^
<
CL
JJ
O














~r\


*t

%
"Q


**

•
ci
2
3


-?

•
:j
^
X.'

*

•
J
jT

13

»V


•
•«J
j;






T3

«*


•
a
"2i





•^
••2
^*






















































































m



•N
^H

o
rvt

M
^Q

*
-<

^j
-^


r-l
p^
J\
^J



•a-
— i

^
T)



fV»


•H
M

-r


u>







CO
[T^
C\i




•wO
kJ
I-H
V-
(J

•M
—
.
3
u.
i^l
a.
a



o

o


o



—i

~t



T)

O




TI
**

N







O


s


'NJ







-O









.^
o
o
*
o

u

u

J



J

— 1


-r


^
v^

•N



0

J




-o


"0





-H

M


O


O







"1
IH






">
0
o
o
J
n
1
o
^>
-J
in
^

ij>



•M

nl
i-H

n


^
>4

m



r,
•^
n




,T>


M







—4


2


ro







rci
'N






0
J
0
•J
r\
^
=
O
o
o
•H

in



•g

j>
M

j
-H

•H
rH

\n



^
"^
vU




n
-1

O







-r»


^


—i







o
^






o
^3
">
O
•J
r-4
O
0
O
m


•-4



•H

11
"O

_,
M

>0
f-4

O
l-l


^

-0




-0


o
1-1






o


•M


•H







-r
>Q






3
a
a
o
n

1
o
0
in
fxj


TD



1^-

•U
V

^
\l

^
VJ

^,
r-i


-H
"*
j
"<



"M
^

i-l
-t




~>

^T\


M


N







;\J
ys






O
o
~?
4>
rvj

,i
•^
o
—4


CJ



-»

J


,j


O


o



,

0




o


0







r^


O


0







o







0
•J
3
0
—4

1
J
J
•n



3



J

0


j


O


0



J

,J




0


Q







.3


0


(J







^5







O
C2
3
•^


,1
o
Ul

—)

O
^



rt^
— 1

»»


N


•H







r^
X\











r-
^
X
'-t.
J
^

J



o

u»
^H

^.
-H

.n
tM

03
rH


J
^
3
— 1



-ft
^1

r-l
"4






>n


r-


n







ro
r^








_)
^
t-
"^Z
u
U
X
h—
X
J
Z

-o



—«

•r
fH

U»


•T
"XJ

«1



-t)

«4




^-
.H

^




r^
r-I

^


n


-\J







•^»
ro













^
3
'_2
t/l

—4
-<


JU

t\J
*}•

XJ
'>




^



-t
^4
03




r-4
^

CO







^


fH


•-*







O
**•














h™*
tu
•e




































































































































'-U
^.
h-

*>•
>—
O
-x
:2
P-
:U
X.
VJ



-1

^
-H

J>


a
t-H

O
rH


_
"-H
^





r-l

—4
^



J*


o


u*


^u







jTV
if)












-J
-C.
H*
•jj
(j

(N.



J»

— 4
11

J
*T


•H

'M
N


N
^
a
~-i



>n
~H

O
M



"H
—f

^
— (

O


o







r-l
r«>
r-<











<
£
t
I
-


LO



V

— *
1 1

M
rH


M

-3
r-t


in

^




^


n




/\1


p^


r-


m







r>*
*j*









U.
~£
JJ
.U
a.
Q

HH


































































































































^
-L.
"5*1
5
J_
>
p~~
j_
'->
>::
'.r;
^
U.
^



^4

V
r^

u>
— l

-0
r4

~4
r-l


•O

T-l
"H



.-n
-H

C/^







•i"^


0


wt*







r*«
xO








^
U
rr
^2
•O
•1
j.
>.
<*.
5^

-O



0>

^
NJ

tl
xT


r-4

-(
*!


,

^.
—4



sr
-4

•o
•M




rH

0
^<

^


xy







'.]>
m
r-4





*
,«l
19
,»

^
r-4
r"
X
Z

s:
X
r-

^
4.
j£

108

-------
cr>
m









u-










UJ
X
(-
o




ex:
CJ Ot'
1 T'' *
O 1- (~
03



*
0
Z
03


§4


, a.
_i uj! -si aj
< X 01
S CD!
a
OI
a
*
CO




4
u
<£

s a-i i uj as
z am.! a.
0 aq iU1 0,| _^
— u.
»— « v-rf
5 a, o o
UJ - VI
o
o
OI
1
o
•w
(/>
tjj
o
IJL
0 -J
UJ <
*r^

at »'
Zi x a
M4


UJ
aijz
OI
03
•*
3"
1-4 U
X,OI
u


z
Of
a
£
01 


O
«$•
o4


CM
«-«

C7>
sf




o»


0>
m



in
CM
^
U
p*4



^
*H
^




O
s
t-
£

J
^*
<
H
a




















i





















































































O.
r-
~«

•H




m
fi


t\




0
in

m





o


o




o

a





>4?








0
CO

r+




CM
H




in
m


CO




in
f>

CO





QA


CM




0>

CM





m
fM






O
O O
at o « w
u o o o

z
a
t-
o o >n
0>

•o




in
^>


0
«CJ



«0
i— (

'-4
ii^




CM
fH

CO




0>

o





r^
•O






o
o
2

m
••4



^.
f>


»J-
f>



tn
<-«

in
f«4




m
t^|

m
•H



^.
-*
•T
•^




O
0
*~ 4





0
o
-o>

03
r-4



O
m


— «
4

m
•*



o
m m


iy
CM



o
-4

00





•r


m




-4
CO
in
-
r •<*
Q. OI
«t X


r«.
fi



«0
l—(

o
c\




GO


o
*H



m
CM
^
ft




fM
CM
•-*.






j
ac

0

CD




•-*
fO


^
c\



0«


f.





O
t-4

CO




rn
m
•o
CM




00
t»










z
Oil
VJl
X! X
>-

o
1-4



^
^>


tn
in



o


^
-4




m
— i

CD
^4



-0
**
N
CM




^.
rn
i-t

















































































































IU
a
£

t-
»M
3
CJ-

(S.




^
•r


m
fi



^
CM

gv
•-4




O


in




0
*^
CO





o
CO










_J
<
2

fN.



f>
00



0>


^
CM




_<
<*4

^.
fW



N
(M
0
tn




r.
CM
OJ









^

ao




CM
CM


^>
CM



00


0>





o»


o
0^



m
•*"
0
•(•




p.
o
•-H







H
Z
UJ
z o
03 OJ
& a.




































































































H-
2J
UJ
Z
ct
UJ
^

CM
•H






f-4
^«



^


O
—1




CO


oo




m
fM
^.
fM




«
0
P^






_)

0>

f^
fN



CM
m


CM
0>



CM
^4

•O
?n




r-«
•-4

— *
C»l



1*.
fM
W
r«




fM
CT*
' Z *!
i O: b' £
O 3 •
t> 	 |
{U. •!!-•
LJ a.;(j
5

<*>






fM





O


o




o

w





m





o
z
h>
ai
UJ

z
•M M •« •» tei •« M LlJi ' '1^ (•••' 1^ !•• ^^J ("1 L— i "^ Hi' f ~l j* TT" ' 3^ m
ooiooovnoincMa i v3 * cc: ;> i^l oc z S? a i >: 5 sE •xj sui
a
o
a
> m o in, i OI
: ..
>— » -
a. 
-------
                TO •
                c
                o
          TO

          
 0) —
 O-  4-1
 3  O
co <:
O.  E
O  (Q

(1)  Dl
>  o
(U  S.
O Q.

                1- T3
                O- <
                            vO CO O
                            SO LA |^-
            O  LA LA
            t^ •— LA
                                        vo
                         \OLA
                            CM
                                                        \o
                                                  co
                                                  PA
                                               GALA
                                                  CM
                                                                       co
                               cn
                               Cn
                               —  CM
                               PAvO
                                                                       CO LA O
                                                                       VO v£> t^
PA on-a-
OO vO  O
CM     CM
       LU
      Q.
                    cn
                    c

                (0  4J
                -a  L.
                            vo vo cn
                            O ol 1--
                               cn CM
                                  PA
          o
          LA
                      O vO
                      — PA
                                                        LA
                                                        -a-
                                                        -a- PA
                                                        -a- cn
                                                                                 -a- \o CM
                                                                                 — o cn
                                                                                 -a- — CM
                             o
                             0)
                             X
                            LU
                             . 3
                TO O
                Z: O
_c
U
0)
C U

14-
L. 14-


4^
*4— 3
<4- U
TO (U
4J X
CO UJ




l»
•^
o
c
3
O
0
1
l_
o
>.
TO



L.
0)
cn
TO
c
TO
^"
1
*—
•^
U
C
3
O
O

C
4}
]—
C
O

•_ .
>
c
LU

4-
o

T3
TO
 1-
L- 0
TO >^
Q. TO
Q) Zl
O


V.
1)
cn
TO

TO

1

•^
o

3
0
O




U
**^

^—
TO
4-1
O
1-


l_
» 3
TO O
z: o

                                                           110

-------
4J  >  (U
O  c  E
Z LU 4J
       L.
t/>    Q.
O  


z
LU
Z
(-
Q:
o.
LU
o

_i
<
H
III
TE.
^2
O
ac
—
>
z
LU

C/>

z en



<4- L.
O 0) >.
-C U
4-1 4-1 C
WOO)
(0 C 01
0- < <
LA
i*e rA


•
o cn
Z LA




IU
4-1
ID

(D
a.
to

00



•
o o
                                       oo CM cnoo
                                       VO m IA-3-
                                        r>--3- CM o
                                        o -a- m o
                                        o CM«O cn
                                       oo ^r -a- -a-
                                        CM    CM —
                                           — m on
                        o oo
                  in m if\ tn
                                                                   cn
                                                          CM CM CM •—
                                                          VO O CTtvO
                                                          m-a- CM cr\
                                                          -a- oo u-\ CM
                  — m— in
                  CM — CM —
                                        IA VO
                                        IA LA
                                                                            vo
                                                                                        -a- oo
                                                                            CM
                                                                               cn
                                                -a- en o
                                                 CM m m
                                                vo o oo
                                                 CM -a- m
                                                                                        -a-
                                                                                        •—  CM «—
                                                    Cv IA PA
                                                    — — CM
                                                          co vo •— LA       oo       cno--
                                                                —          CM —          — •—
o
o
                               cn
                              vo
LA r
CM CM lAvp
                      cn tA CM
                      m-a- IA
                                                                            — LA       LAvO •
                               
 O O
a.
   O O O
   O O O
   O O O
    •>  «  «
   O O O
   O LA O
   LA CM —
    I   I   I
   O O O
   o o o
   O O O
    »  .  »
   O O O
   LA O LA
   CM —
                                        O)
                                        CO
                                       a:
                                                             
                                                             O
                                                                                8
 a.  a>
 
-------


h-
0
«;

>-
z

o
o
'
i
1
j
i
1
i
u-l
OH
2
«/1
UJ
•>
•—
z;
2:
o
o























1
UJ
'JJ
»—
*-
»M
Z
z
o
o








o
z
t-*4
t—
a:
0
a.
UJ
ac














«»
9



f\
•r

S





CO
•o
f-<





r
>»•
~4
*H



vO
in

•T





in
rw










o
O
O
•
0
o
in
ac
UJ
•>
0

>o
tn
in
r-<



J"
•T

T

1^-
N





in
«>








O
§
.
0
>n
r%
1
U
o
10
•
o
o
i-

eg
r-
>*•
>r



00
rg

r~
•-i





-*
•0








o
o
0
«
0
0
•H
1
o
o
°
o
r

u
a




0


a





o









o
0
o
•
o
in

1
0
o
0
•
un
r

o
o




a


a





o









o
o
0
•
J\
eg

1
O
,0
i°
•
li 0
r

0
a




0


u





o









o
a
O
•
0
~4
•
1
0
O
a
•
to
!

o
o




o


0





u









0
0
o
•
\r\


1
'0
' O
< in
t *
J1










3
a:
t~
z
UJ
2
;H-
lac
I8

irJ
00-
«•»



in
!N

m
•M





-<
tn















!x
1 t-
i a
'a
r

fM
•T
•r
r~l



00
«n

<7«
— t





ro
m















K-
t/1
r-

































































v

H-

«r

V*
-y





•T
•^
•^














t_»
ac
»—
UJ
X

—4
«0
m
m



a«
r
m













o
a:
H-
UJ
z
z
u





























































H-
z
UJ
3C
cc
UJ
>
a
o
u.
u
s
a
u
u.
—
«r
•o
•f
«n



vO
n

o»
»-<






«r
rg
m



rg
m


ro



in
rn

r-
•-i






-------


-J
•^
Mt
u
HH
u.
u.
u
_i
—

»«H
-J u.
< it
z o
UJ
I
—
Z O
Ul
•
£ o
Z Z
o
0
o
Ul
H
^
§

Ul
0







Ul
wU
CO

pm
o
z

WJ
4^
I


z
Ul
Ul
co

VI

X

























UJ
t»
o






v>
Ul
M*
>••
z
r>
w

5*

•
-j
^
t«»
O
H-










































































0.

O
13

O
K-
««
-J
"^
^
U
a.

eg


vfj





en
f^*

«
•*





«N
r«l












O
O
o
a
m

sc.
vU
2»
O
-o
in


in
~4




^r
*¥

«v

NT


>n
(V




^i
in

o









o
o
0
0
o



o





a


w






0










o
o
o
o
o m
mi«v >^
r ij i
olo o

o
0 0 O1 0
»l •• « w
O O CJ
in
rg
o m
1
m
*v

a



o





o


0






o










o
o
o
a



O





0


o






o










o
o
o
mio

o
m
in


o
(M




r»
•T

DO
Ml





ao
«n














H-
LU
X
^
X
o

u
>o


o
^


(M
•-4




0
•*>

co
-4





O
f>

















t— >-
^J (/)
Qi Ul
1*













































































U]

1—
•X
I/I

o
at
|M*
Ul

«>





0
fWi)
















O
ac
v»
Ul
z
«
in


00
f\i




r-
•T

in
iv





m
m














O
UJ
X

3:
u
"*•








































































t—
z
VU
X
Z
UJ
>
O
a
u.
u

a^
at
O
u.

f*.


u

^
«»•





j.
vO






§
£f* ^v*
2 o
I— I—

Z H
— CO
Q *

•"1
O
X
fv
IM(
X
^
a
^

X
i—
J»4
^
                                       vn
                                        o
                                        CM
                                        f\l
                                       CO
113

-------
<£.

<
1
        CJ

        a.
           o.

            l
            I

           u
           x
           o
                                              114
                                                                                      O' a:
                                                                                      h- o>

                                                                                      S5

                                                                                      U£
                                                                                      — CO

                                                                                      — z
                                                                                      x:
                                                                                      o

-------








\\^








ae
,i


ac
UJ
x
03


d^

o •



I i •
o
z
CO


Q (- H











j 0.

cc

6*

*
U- UJ <£.i -
«j i—
CQ z
< =3
1- O
O

UJ
i
UJ
o
J
*"





u.
**^; w
X! O
UJ

z

UJ] CO

I
p^l
f1*! Wi

Xi UJ; t
°

^
UJ
0
UJ
!•»
o


u-  Zi
UJ JJ
^™ 11
_ u.
i- a













O> OI CO
X













uJ
Q






































































d
-i
1
i



CO




H
o;
p>i


>*•
IV



i
i
S




V






V*




I-



oo
f^




V)



























a
^™l
zd
a
y
j
^

*
•J







3













































a.

>o



r-l


0*
-*
(f>



In


in




v^
—t
«n




f^




fM



O
*H








0!
OC *"^

z
o
0
Of
in
f\


r»1


CM
•f
in



in
rg


m




CO






0




o



eg
^•4






O
(M
r*H


m


CO

o
•-<


~*


03




•r

^




^




*•*



-o
r\






Q
ao



0



— | m
^j
31 UJ
a.
o
a
0
1





























































































z
o

u
UJ
oc
in! «j
1 1 1 « kj

m


(7«
eg
in



in


-O




*o

^




^o




•H



r*
iH








-1
OC
5
r*t -O
I**


m


o
•J-
o
r-


(NJ


•c




co

f\




f\




w



IT
t>











o o o O1 o O! o' eg x ^t o|
o O o o! o1 o o^ a. LL>
o' o o> o o; o> u*. a -«; x x,1 x
o o o in oi in rw o
in o
m
11







•H


•n

-0



*> i — r— < i— r— ]
Oi (xi ac: =7 (A
O Oi O Ol UK
UJ^ Zj Zj VJ 3E
















































3
H
t-
V!

cc
H
UJ
X
m
^4


CO


CO
m
0
CM


(M


*




co

^




-o




m



(T^
in













O
Qp
hb
UJ
X
^.



t-l


o

o
-H


o
rg


m




fV
^4
m




^O




•»•



in
rw










O
Q£
V-
UJ
a.
z
u
z
-»-



































































































H-
z
UJ
jr_
Z
r-



*•«


m
ro
in



O


n




(*1
•H
eg




o








in
«^



O
rg


co


P^
CM
_l
•^


JJj


m




0

^




(T\




rg



«H
^



o£
o
i
o



0


^
*
vf
•H


2


m




in

•H




V




rg




-------







_
^c
u
Wri
t—
 Q.
Zj
cj* -y
 od cx.j «-«
< S3
o °
u.
u. uj
13 2
Of UJ
h-jtO
«o at
o tot sj -•
^ i-i .q i—
z a? acj >
3 U4 >-« — i
O Qj >j
J3
O *"
Ul
5
J?
^"^ CX
 u
UJ J
• o a
CM U. •*
o "J
UJ Q
-J to
00 Z
2 °
H
O UJ
§ °

-J C
< oc
1- 4
Ul

o

s 5
z *"*
Ul .
yi^
X ~J
aid



z
Ul
UJ
03
4>t









a
Q
Ul

4f
a
z


CQ


8*

•

2




zl
^3
aj
a









CO

































































rxi!
f*^
C>





^*








•O




O
in


—4
p-
vn



T









•oi

0
m





r-
!*•












2





(O
f*»




CO
Ul
M4
H-
z
c
u
u
_














i
j

^_
H.

















































a
c
at
z
a
IMl
H-

cr

m





o>
•o


•^
•^


in
M
«H



vn
r^

nj
fH





^4
VO


*





S9
tm







O
o
0
•
o
o
in
05

^





oo
y^


r*



in
o»



p«
^}

CO






•n
r-


^





o

p.
fH





f»
r»


o





*o
f%






o
o



-r
in

<*>
•^





in
p»


co
— «








0


o






o



o





•TIO
OJ













olo
0|O
o o(ojo
•i W • •
0 WOO
o m o 

o

o













o






0:0;



0
o



o



o
o



o


o






o









o








o
























o!



0





0







g


















OjOSO'
w * «
*n o m,o
r\li -«j Oj
! 1 »°
ill H
O 0 O1 <\|>
O O1 O!
1 O O O' Oi O! O tl^i X|

Q» ^ vf> O! U\ r>j
^l^ll
-«!




2
3


















































z
#•
V*
l»4
o
Ul
oc
u
••4
a
»»

-
-<





m
CU


in





ao
•H







2
UJ
0

o





! ^ |

.H

in1
(








co rj. ~«















CO; r- o!




i

m oo; — «
"*


0
K



^
r-

(NJ
•H





„«
r~


••





r-
»H







"•*


0
g



,r
"-O

«


in
—4






i^








j i 	







































o oti c£ :> (A-








































I/
t*
«
t-
 o ui i v-
Si3336"!*!.
Ul
z
^{-vj

O





r— -i
O;
rn





1-4
O
rg



o
s£>

P.
fNJ,





«O
r^


IM

a
c
u.
L.
£
UI_ADMINI
ADMINISTI
WN
a
T-
•hi
i-
:-f
^^
|*«
ad t-»i»-i
Ul 2
*
U
2^
^
Z
a
116

-------
CO

o
UJ
oc
o
ec
i
M

E
o
>-
                 a

                 UJ


                 x
                 a.
                 x
                 uu
                          •o
                          m
                          m
                 IL
                 o
                                sr
                                «n
m
CO
o
X
UJ

Ul
ec
o.

u.
o
<

X
                               UJ
                          jj
                          -j













Q.
3
o
o»
g,


O
"*
M


O
•H



O
oc o
o o

2
Q
u*

-i
M«

co
«^

o
o
o
09
*
a»
*N

0)
un
-4
tri

O
>&

O
m
sr
«n
S9

in
m
0
r*


rn

0
^
in
GO
«i»
"*
-0
sr
oo
01


r-
OJ
CJ
00
sr
a
co
01
01
in
o
VJ
m
o
(*x>
in
o
O

0


a

o


o


o
o

o


o

0





o
o

o




o


a



o o, o o o o
o o o o o o:
•1 W « » •< w
o! o O; o; in> o m o
o *n o! m
J in; o* -«i
00) | fit
r\j.'-« -io

1
i in
I l! «•
+*' o o o; o1 o; o: o1 o: oil
»- in
«t
-J;OC
O OiOO'O O O
o o: o o o o; m ut
•^•^•MW«k<*JlwUJ
3! uj o O: oi m o m
o- > >n| o' .n
c?
a
a

OI 1M4




OJ


—4





oj, a



z
o
"
                                         m;
                                         Q! o N-
                                                                           CO
                                                                        m
                                         V CO
                                         misr
                                                                           -i

                                                                           ac
                                                                           H-

                                                                     -*'l/)'UJ

                                                                     Q. UJ1
                                                                     *i x i
                                                                     CC'KH-
                                                                     Ojoc'ct:
                                                                     Oi O, O
                                                                     uj z z
                                                                     o
                                                                              OJ
                                                                              OJ
                                               X


                                               OI'JJ
                                                                                    in
                                                                                          rq
                                                                                       in
                                                                                             m
                                                                                       m
                                                                                          in
                                                                                          m
                                                                                          in
                                                                                                00
-" cc uj
acj z; = o
   Mt 11
   >••*
UJ O
                                                                                       I
                                                                                                         in
                  o P-
                  (M OO
                                                                                                               in
                                                                                                               N
                                                                                                               OJi
                                                                                                         in
                                                                                                      <33
                                                                                                      O
                                                                                                            CO

                                                                                                         w
                                                                                                               in1
                                                                                                                 in
                                                                                                                    00
                                                                                     uj!
                                                                                     UJ

                                                                                     z!
oi r> z a; H-
[J> pj;  | j I—tl UJ| 3!
   O! _i' i/>! uj;o'
U,|'l l—'iO;:
ui cc o H
           !z
                                                                                                      z»'JC!.
                                                                                                      U;0,0
                                                                                                      UiO *-
               UJ
                                                       117

-------
      oc

      §
      OQ
o
a:
OO    UJ
CM
      Z
UJ    ui

si    M
oo    —
<    I-
      o

      u.
      o

      z
      o
€£.
O
      o'a ra
       > UU
           ,« o
             •   -»I  I
            UJ f-iQi

            ae,|-«i
                                        (M
                                             o
                                                    >!O
                                             O^O
                                             O O
                                             o
                                           §s
                                           o o
                                   io o'ir» o'.n o
                                           ii
                                           o o
                                                        in
                                                                «Q!.CO
                                                                rn csj'o
                                                                (M r>j N
                                                          in
                                          r»lr*
                                          oim
                                     i
                                                           ,i
                             tM|  i
                               jlOC1  *
                               3 LU o
                               Q. >:m
                               =J'OJ»M

                               °-i  I
                                   o
                                        O,«A
                             ••-U!
                             Ol
   t-i2
 -«!i/VUJ|
'   |:
iakuj   I  i
i^ J-!x|x!
 a|i-*-iH:
 OJQC ne'^:
 o;ox>:cj
                                                      o
                                                         «i


                                                       tn m

                                                       -*•
                                                                       O
                                                                       m
                                                                       oo
                                                                          vn|vr
                                                                          in
                                                                            m
     O
     Z
    ILU
                                                                         ;i<
H-iae a>
Z;3:O
                                                                                    VW
                                                                                         aoiv
                                                                                               vO
                                     ooimjvni
                                  CO'Oj'
                                  in
                                                                                       fM
ZiS
3iS
   u
                                                                                            •^-
                                                                                               CO
                                                                                               o
                                                                         *-lz
                                                                         at!
iXlt-

!*  •
   a.
 OJJJ
 Hoe
                                              118

-------















l-

Ul
o
—
IS.
UJ
Ul
3
O

O
H
-
Ul — •
_J 0
CD
1- 0»
Ul
O
^
o.
X
Ul
co O
z z
o <
— o.






^

o:
UJ
£
S

l-
>— £
to


•,«?

o
z
0}

M4 a.
z
~^
0 i*?
^ J
£ UJ
•£. >


•
O UJ O
O

U
z
Z

H» 03
O <
•-< >
ocio:
U I.U
t-j«rt
t/>
X









o

<3£
^
o.

z
UJ
rsl
~4J
CC
Q.


o
Z
Z

«3
_J
0.

z
o
£
S
e»

u

OJ



4
O
z

-n


ui •
UJ
a:




V> X -4
12 oi
y
Z UJ
0 >
o ^
X



^— 
C3
z






«-«io:ao
u or

Q
OJ



o
ca


























































^
fM


m

o
rn


fM
<0
^



CO

0»


0"
^
^
rO
•4-


CO
^
O
•«
o
o
m
y>
00
«
"^
•0
*
a,
r-
m
m
OP
sr
•o
>r

o
"i
0

o

o

o

0

o

o

o

o

o


o
o


o

0

0

o

o

o

0

o

o

o


o
o a o
O O O O 0 O 0
o


o

0

o

o

o

0

o

o

g,

0





o o o o >n o .'vo
jo o m o in rs» -4, o
z| Win tM -«
O!o fill
'sr>
III «•
— • o o o o o o o o CM
»-;m o o o o o o 0'
 m o °n fM -H >z
00
*5-|
"O *^
1 i
i3
j
1
             CM
               fM
          rn
         i-TiffVfM
              x o: :
       O











UJ
a.
t«
r^
3
o
fM
fM
JO
fM
•0
ro
00
«*•
-r
fn
r-

_j
x
fM
•O
03
-U
33
-0
O
r-
cr
•4-
•T
•T
r-t
in
x-4

DO
2
00
fM
S
in
c-
-4
(M
r*
— t
— i
-o

-------







:LJ
u
.x
O
u.
UJ
UJ
I
>-
UJ

t-H
^>
g
Z
o
'
o 13
^
£ JJ
Ul
X1
o — ;t
tr\ o ^_J
Ul >- ^
-J 1- «.
CD — (f\
< " *
t— ,
u. '— '
0
O H^
O £f
H 1-
o ^
Z i.j
3 i.
Z
^ *"•*
i
n_

a.
a
•
0
z




















^
^
•J

X
t-H
>
aJ

J
Z
^P
_t
'jj
•>
Lj







J
i
H-

^.
~
-3

*-i
O


^
~£
^
Cj
2
••*
!/>





>•
Q
O




u
I—I
-J
-o
;3
a.


%.
•5
£
.3

•£
3.


X
JJ
-J
-•U
X
3.

Z
k~4
t-
a:
a.
OJ
at















<
•**

•
O
<


'9


•
a

-1

;t


•
J

A


^J-
-T
,-4



•\J
^
V
tJ




N|
""
0
UJ



OJ
•rv
!M




I/)
^
p-<
t-
O

1
_
-


























































































































1.
"^
-^


•?
c
•-^
V-
*»•
™
a.
^
Q.
O

"*


0
^


tsl




O
-*•

eg




o
-4-


•M





-o
rx)
""




o
•jj
-r




r»










-3
^3
•»
-3
t^
\f\

U
5»
u.

J

w


^
»-<


<^




J
3

'7>




N
,\l


\>4





!M
M
CM




-TJ
r*»
P^




^







O
^3
O
•o
'^
T\
I

CJ
o
3
_r
N

IH

''


M
>J


•T




O
r-

%^-
rH



O
^\


o
1-4




N
-M
-t




a
n
o
•-*



ao
••*






^
o
3
•^
a*
\J
I
-_J
o
O
'"j
o
•—

u>

•r


j,



^>




^4
-^

•J
>^



N.
-A


O
~\J




•a
-T
-M




!M
f^
M
I'l



U
-T






O
^3
^>
;3
O
~>4
|
J
O
J
:j
\A


^

•U


^



•O




a
T)

O
"O



-o
sQ


•r\
•f




•o
*
^




-i
UJ
•T>
Ul



'5J
^U






o
J
•3
'^
1^

1
^
0
^>
•JT\
c\


-0

«•


^
^-1


o%
r-l



JO
J3

CO
J^



m
•A


3s
n




in
*
o




•Jt
o
1^.
'*•



r\J
t-4
rH





O
J
^
•J,-\
,\

1

-5
C;
-j
r^


"

"-»


O



o




0


o




o



0





o

o




•J

(J




0







o
2
'->
•
.— 1

I

"2
'-3
lA



^

-'


O



o




3


0




o



o





^)

0




J

(J




o







D
J
O
j-V


1
(J
•^
•s\
^



o

^


o



•3




3


O




-j



^3





O

o




-3

^J




.3










~
•^
^
..
^\

a:
^
^
^



























































































































-f
*-H
Y
i -*-

\J
—4
X
a
•y

^(
u
^
CO

•**


o
t-4


in
iH



•A
•o

I—I
^o



0



,1^
vO




_,
^
OJ
-r




^.
•^
0
r~



•-A
V*











i«
^
•^
.u
X
^
^J
>*

l»-

K>


-r,
-H


O
rH



y\
SO

r*~
j)



1^.
J%


ro
x-f-




.')
•T
'^




,-,
r*™
^
4->



^^
P**








-J
rC
^_
-P'
..
^_j

X
£
_
^

«

•**


n.
r— l'


sO




\l
'^

O
0



^
r


j^
—4




JJ
0
—1




•J>
J
,>.
^



•f-
11















X
5
_
r/

_2j

sO


_,
— 1


A




r
•o

~4
^



^
•Vi


^N
—4




l/>
'^

•"
^.
">



a»
•a-
















^/i
u
^j




























































































































OJ
a.
i_

•>•
i—

o
>
x
^>*
u
z
VJ

r-


0
i—l


^3
-H



^>
"^

-J
^J*



UN
vj-


jj
'M




"i)
^
0




r-.
•°
.-J
••'1



p.
IA















— 1


--,
A


— 1
•*




^
"*"
-H




-,
^
-r
-1



r^
u^
^— 1












2

a
a

J7

-,

\i


T
M


•j\




^
>

,_j
J»



^.
_r\


-A
M




O
r\
•^




r>.
"^
-r
ni



^f
^T









1—

; ^
] _J

t L
•i.

yj



























































































































I—
J-
*T
3
_j
7>

^

a.
u
x
3d.
^
u.
«

•r


o
C\]


•a
'H



^
co

,3
•0



XI
O


'•J
^




J
-A
O




C
•i)
^
Ul



o
GJ








—
I_J
^
~^
_J
o
•1
--
J.


U


_,
-H


h.
— 1



-o
-o

•'J
.J-
^


-\J
A


r\J
^




r—
-n
in




•n
*"**
u
•V



y>
LT>
r-l





^
aj
~»
-i
'»
*>•
r
__ j
i— <
-j
^5
rj
O

O

vj


•J



J3




(^
'J

A




-,
j>


n





,-)
•^
N




^
"•
'•4




-o











-*
~j
>~t
• r
'S,
~~<
-^
J
^J

*>

<->


~2
'1


rj




-j
T<

tj>




-_,
-A


LA





^
U
-O




}
JU
03




O
r-4








r)

*— «
t-
, J^
^.
•X

5
.J
H

^

rt


-,



0




•3
O

,r>




p.
O


•N





r-.
•°
-M




p.
U
•M




r,,






^
*-H
H*
J_
'—

~^
3E

r-

X
U
.'g

120

-------
of
i




 <*sj|
MI j M!
^ i-i p- _»! •
z *•«
0 U
10 Q
^2 5
22
3: z
O QJ
0

f
U
 >->' D
£ 3
LU *"*
•z.
O
a:
~
^
LU U.






0
Z !
N V
™ as
H Z
0
1-
CJ

o
LU
_l
<
O
LU
a.
CO
















_j

O
z


Z
k«4
1— —•






QC <
O w
Q.
OJJ









































ft^
r-


00
00
— 1


CX|


*J*
in



so
in
rvj





CO
UU
|M4
H-
£3

J
w
_ 1



(^



o
VjJ


ro







tf*




CO
rH







c?

f)
«o


co
tn


er



^"




0
»•<


00
p-4



OJ
i-H
••*







^5



o



0



Cj)




O









C^



0



o



o




o








0 o q>

O



O



o



cr




o









0 0 O 0 O O.
o 010 o o!O'





















































Z
o


oi o1 o o! oun o in o
a o,«n o in r\j
•< vni tM
o1 i i
Oi C^' CJ
•"i
o o
i- m| o; o a o
o


00
r^


r»
•««



in
(JS









ol
a:


,^
r-


fC^
in


in
4j X at
_jj ac •k|*HH«i»/H»'aj
"^ tU
a.
o
a
o
O o O!in
in
o iniovi
1 1
O

in

r\l

C3
z


•T



QH
P«4


>H
OJ


CD




o»
rn













ai'-u1
«*:X X X

-0



p-
-


CI7 OC GC Z5| I/)
O
UJ
O
U
a
z
Q|ai
uo|3:
1






























































UJ
a.
K.

3-
X
o


ac.
UU

ao
in


ff\
ra


m
f*>


cr
•H



r-
m












^
a.
1—
^y
01
U

•-4
00


f>*
(SI
«-H

(M
<-4


cn
»4



P-
in
•««











z

•*•
-0


00
fNI


<0
<*>


^O
r+



sr
^*










!„
z
LU
a
< ai
s*
QC
CD
I?
UJ
Cj
z































































Z
LU
y
Z
LU
^^
O
0
a.

3^
a.
u
u.

r*4
r-


ph
m


m
y









-U!
0
z
^


^

o
fl


rn



0
p"
o


«M



ro
«y I ro


«r




o
r~4










Z
«-*
x a H-
_J oOl-U
'I »-'oO;ar
* O •"!
U, Z' 3C
>*' ^' aC
x;
o
a
o
u
Z
•^
H


<^




m







Z
*•«
1—

j-

z:
51
a

•
a.
aj
ac
121

-------








SE
O
w%
CO
SE
o
u
-J
£
Ul
'X.
0
0£
•sc.
Ul
I ••«•' CO

w

o
^



•o
>o








l/>
OI
M4
J^
o

_J
J
^
*
«3
H*
o
H-





























































































a
3
O
0

z
o
*-«
5
S

CM



O


O




o


O



O
••4

ft%




CO













o
o
•b
0
0
in
r*'
rn

•^



r-
-o

eg




o


o



r-
•o

fM




m










m

f*1



co


-H




03


"*








o










0

o



o


0




o


o



o


C3




O










o o
O'O O O'O O Oi
O,O O'O O|O 0
o o o|o
ol'-n o
in1 CM' ^
vn

1 t I |
a o o o
m o
eg

*-4

1 1
J>iO
io
lin
1 : *
O!O!O CM
O O O'O O O O
O o o OiOiO'in at
D|oi o o o m
rt
o
&
>im o m CM
Oleg ~?

00



o
•u

f\f
y^



o
rg














H-
rg|™

O
f-«


>0
•f

^4
p^




•J

^



m
«

in
P^



,,
fM











-J
aC

f>



fM
fM

IM





eg

eg



03
r-

p^




0>














*-i
Z
OO OJ
^' w^i
OI
JL
1
X X
co

in



eg
'O

00




— «
rr>

*



•0
•r

•o




m
«H


















^«* r™ i r~ p^



























































































til
a.
^

>.
H-

X
at
O^O U '_)'0|: it-
01
o
Z Zi ^^
1
3;

OI
£
r-
eg

-O



m
O

•O



•0
•*

iH
,«ii^



CM
«r

o
-4



sf
in

fo
r-J



>r
fM















n
r-4


O
-o

ovj
•M4



vn
JV

Zj



•n
m

— i
**4



O
»v












,«
z
UJ
3
2 ^
2 S:i
5 CQ a
'•U "^ Z
Ot *"
!
•H




























































































1—
z
01
y
fif
u*
01
^
O
O

u.
U)
z
n

o*



fM
in

N




fn
«<•

o



^
•*"

r*»
^^



m
r\4











_/
^
Z

co
m

n



CO
m

rr»
^



eg
m

^



cr
in

o
fNI



NT
rn









ac
OI
O
Z

«T
ai f

•1
Jt
O

o



n
m

f-4




m
m

*•*



r-
••o

eg




n














2^
O
0

fq



O
eg

r-4




u
-0

m



- rs-z: ^ a.
•xi^ti;? olo oi

o.
z:

(j

U

H-

ac

122

-------
1 l"»
t/» U
§ -t<3 ! •£! 01
— -U . O.; 1—



•
^fc ^' ^j ••^ LM
o Xj uj| o
t£ J jj
° s3
2 >H M| 
-=

"
•«
^ ujf o' Of
s H i d CD
10 •>
z <
ui X
M
o
Ul
-1 >-
«D t- ii,
calT
(N












vsl o
o
id •
qo
3 -.3
m
-J C3C
CDIO
a| .
in
m
••••




^f

f\
»>^





r-
rw








O
«r
>r
•^
f\i





fT]















O
o
C3





O

O






O









0
^j
O





o

tj






0
o





o

CJ






Jo*









o









0
o
o





o

c?






o









o
u





o

o






o









J





















































5
o
"f
J
o
!\ti (\




0

^
•"4





0
*^









O Oj 0 O O 0 0 -1
OOjOOiOtOO | O


o
m
I
CJ
o
0
•^l O; -n f\j| -4 oi i





•o
in

m
<\j





m
^^










_j

QC
h-
nl 0| M Z
g
1 1 1 I1 1 •<
iO! CJ| O Oi O! t\j
H




tfl


*-H





f\
fT^

















































li






























^
2
t-
«a
t-
^
QC
H-
u.
;
•0
O
m *?












ad
•T
•—I
IV




?>

fH»
(•^






> r z!
C3 ^9 "^
u. ^> < :s
t-* 'JJ i U
J^| jn 2
"C" *•- — ^ • --I XX
•*Pt *"*i r*j 3C
tji -jf ^ ^)
123

-------

t-
o
X.

Ul
^
a ^
§ X
§
CD ,
_J "J
< cc
t °
LU uj
4» -M^
z -^

§ X
>
Ul
z
Ul
Nl u.
E °
O •
^_ O
g z
=J
O
U

u.
Q

z
o


Ul
a:
o






a
a/
I-
4
cu
OC
u
z
Nl
1—
—«
0
0
ai
H»
^

























a
CO

^
l«4
H-
**4
"J


a
33
nc
*•«
^
Z
UJ
o
z

H*
ac
o
a.
LU
ac
















«i


4V


•
O
<•






«n
^O
, ^





Ul
LU

I-
y
3
a
u

-i


JJ
^
o








































































Q.
"^
^j
ac


z
o
|H»
^J
3
a.
a
^
o
f*l

^.
<-4




gx
(*1















V-
l/l
LU
X
H-
OC
O
z
4.
•o


r*
f\




•o
tn

«n
•H




CM
•r











_j
^
ac
t-
z
u

X
H-
CX
U
z
y.
sQ


•O
ro




•4
fr^

•«
M




4
u v m


















X
f~


















H-
•3 is>
QJUJ
"1"












































































1/1
^3
H«



«\
f»




m
(T^

O





(T>
•H
f^

















oc
K>
'OJ
z
m
o


cif
ro




r^»
pn

0>
•M




IN
m















o
OC
LU
^
Z
u
z






































































H*
z
LU
^
z
a:
LU
>
c

u.
Ul
a;
u
u.
(T
>O


m
fi




~4
CO

-O





rH
in





§
a*
in


00
m




-*
•T

^
CM




•^*
•o






1-
< a;
£ o
«/> 
-------
i
I
      3
      o
IA
       u
       Q
       K
       iiJ

      H/>
                          03
                       QC.
                       UJ
                       X
                          o
                          z;
                          OJ
             ^

             i.
s:
u.
o

at

JJ
                    a
                    x
                       UJ
                       a.
                    OJ


                    a*
                •U

                O
                -J
                          a
          a.
          x
          LU

          UJ
                       -J
                                -o
                                N
                                t\)
                                '03
                                U
                                •J
                                          m
                                                in
                                                ro
                                             f\)
                                                fM
                                             04
                                          csi
                                          CO
                                             m
                                             CO
                                                oo
                                          o
                                          :f\
                                       n
                                             !V
                                       t3
                                          O
                                       O
                                       O
                                       O

                                       o
                                       o
                                          D
                                          O
                                          a
                                                   rn
                                                   o
                                                   o
                                          j|c
                                          •j
                                                i
                                                      o
                                                      •N
                                                          u
                                                         CD
                                                             o
                                                             •o
                                                             o
                                                             o
                                                                o
                                                                o

                                                                   o
                                                                   o
                                                                   o
                                                                         •jj
                                                                             IN
                                                                             N
                                                                             Ifi
                                                                             m
                                                                             -u
                                                                                00
                                                                                o
                                                                                -J
                                                                                   50
                                                                                   •si
                                                                                      !\J
                                                                                      in
                                                                                      try
                                                                                      CO
                                                                                            IJJ
                                                                                               03
                                                                                               CO
                                                                                               in
                                                                                               in
                                                                                               •j
                                                                                                   '0
                                                                                                   no
                                                                                                            fNJ
                                                                                                            O
                                                                                                            03
                                                                                                            CsJ
                                                                                                            3}
                                                                                      ra
                                                                                      ao
                                                                                                               •M
                                                                                         ae:

                                                                                     £°
                                                                                     Z  ^

                                                                                     o,5
                                                                                                               ne
                                                                                                                  CVJ
                                                           125

-------
       v>
       o
       o
       (/)
       z
UJ
       u.
       o
o

1
          UJ


          ex
          o
          u.


          OJ
                    3
Qi
Jj
J,


O








a



a
                           99
                           a
                           z
                    2
                           a
                 a
                 «.
                 u.
                 a
                        5;
                        u
                        p

                        a.
                        O
                        H
                        O
                        a.
                        OJ
                                  in
                                  o
                                  in
                                  CO
                                  ;M
                                  rv
                                  vO

                                  01
                                  <-o
                                     ^~



                                     -T
                                            fVJ

                                            rM
                                               '•?
                                            -O
                                               t"
                                                  'M
                                        (NJ




                                        "0
                                               tr
                                                         o
                                                                o
                                            cr>
                                                            o
                                                      o
                                                             o
                                                             o
                                                      o
                                         a.
                                         o
                                         a.
                                                                   o
                                                                   o
                                                                   o
                                                                      o
                                                                      0
                                                                      •j
                                                                             CD
                                                                             CD
                                                                                CM
                                                                                CT>
                                                                                •-O
                                                                                
-------
G
UJ
Z
UJ

**? ***'
i £
In u
3§ £
O
o *£
™J *Si
P r*
Z K"
UJ «-
«£»
Z
O
K
rC U
m ut
ui z LL
j £ a
CO Nl
<£ _ ,
1- H- a
o Z
£
z
o
0
Ch
UJ
Kl
3
O
UJ
o.
to


d
UJ
a
1/1

Y^»-
u

i
c
0.
W
i/l
•^





















a
01
'Nj
_l
^t


a
SI
2
<



z
«•*
>•"
a:
O
r

cr




o,
in







UJ
h^
~?

_j
_j
i













o
o
0
o
m
LU
O
f-


m


^
f*

co




^
•-i








O
o
o
o
o
1
o
CJ
o
o
in
CM
in


i\
1-4

rg
rn

IS.




«N
H
}•


K1
f"

^




*n
•^










-j
^
s
x
d.
id
*
H
m


ip


•o
IP

tr




0
rH













X
-3
a
1
t_J
in


r*


o
'JT»

«•"




,3.
i-1














fl
UJ
1



























































H
£
 -
i 2
X.
C

r
1 21
• -^
>^
=
127

-------









«/>
z
o
to
VO

0
_l
£
tu
o
cc
>
Ul
•
DO Z
ft Ul
Nl
Ul —
— 1 h-
CQ —
< 0
" g
3 Q
0 0}
0 ™
Q Z
Ul UJ
M rsl
— »— <
i t
< 5
0 U
III
uu
Q.
to
• >
U*
o

Ul
OL




















a
i-«
••i
u
VI


cc
UJ
>—
<
X





ae
M4
<




1
o
uu
a.

to
**



















K
Ul
X
K
»


UJ
H-
J
V-rf
<
•^

















03

W


*
O
z
03

wr

t
VJ
£.
O3

«*

•
CJ
<£
OJ


»A
3T

*
0
z






cc









































































f»
•H

•O



•f
J\

&
^«4

O
>r

>f
•-(


o
«0


.-«
fM





in

UJ
i— i
H-
2
3
O
u

_J
_J
<

«>
	 1
•rf
<»
H-
o
»-
































































































O.
^
O
«n
fM

»»<



vn
fM

-1


O
m

fM


«n
r~


m






•*•












OC 0
«J

z
o
**
H-
«l
__l
vn
fM

fM



O
-n

>»•


o
in

-r


"i
o


m






a?











o»


*+



vn
•T

m


vO
m

>r


^
in


o






-4
—•










0 0
0:O
0,0
«*•
"<

fM



vn
r-

o»


f>
f*>

•»•


CO
m


r»






fM
«-«










o


o



o


o


o


o


o



0






o











O O
Oi O
olo
»» •( •( •
O O OlCJiO
oio in o in
w in, fM, f>«{
0 1 ' 1 j 1 | |
o[ cj o: O' o
in
rr-
•^ >**
3:cU
o o O:O
o o;o o
o


0



o


o


o


o


0



o






o











O


o



o


o


o


o


0



o






u











o


o



o


o


o


o


o



t>






o











ojo o
O 010
oioio
o


o



0


o


u


o


0



o






0












w W •!
inloiinjo
fM -1
1
1

1
O OIO
o
m
••
fM
QiOiOi
oto-miat
o o, o'inloixvifM a
rx; >! m o mifMi"*! !
u
a
u

rvj i-i'










Z
0
































































































z
a
o
Ul
ac

u
ta4
X
a.
^
.•f
HI*
0

CM



r*
-o

CM


i^-
>o

fM


f.
•O


CM






fM















h-
l/>
•~t

fM



CO
in

r»


rvj
>r

m


m
•n


vT






rM
»^










-J
<
Oi
t—
5


















I! -c I
, 	 1 1 	 1 1 	
»•
«*

f>4



*
^

-»


«M
i to



















































Ol U' O' U| -Jjl
jj
o
2

Zi*/!
1
31
















































3
H-
«l
»-
V>

ac
V-
iu
X
vO
»«

»r



CO
>r

(M
r«4

O
^T

O
i-4


T

*


U
r»


r-






o
•••«














o
at
h->
UJ
X.
Z
0
z































































































»—
z
UJ
z
z
(X
ai
>
O
o

u.
v_r
z
ac


o
fM

fM



O
^

J-


O
«

-O


o
f-


r»






o
•-I






O»
<-«

n



0
m

cr>


aj
tn

o


w»
SJ


~«
i-«














o
5^
ae o
K- h-
SI
^~ r^
«• 
Z, —
Ol 2
<
H-
•3
O
~c
H-
ip4
13=

Z
Q


^'
1—
"M
3:


f.
^
U
•y
£*.
X
2
Z>

128

-------
              o •—
              L. L. m
             Q- 4-> (U
                 ID u
              O z >-
              4J    3
                 4-1 O
              CD O in
                              O
                              cn
                         o \o co ^o LA r-»
                         CM    CM PA PA PA
                         CM —  r-» •— cn o
                                — LA Cn CM
                                         CM
                         VO -3- CM  r~-
                          PA PA PA PA
                          r— CM cnco
                          cn — co  cn
                      vo  i-» r-~
                      CM  PA PA
                      o  o o
                      LA  CM CM
                          CM •—
                 LA LA P^
                 PA PA PA
                 cnvo LA
                 cnvo CM
                    CM
                     in
                     o
             M- L.  a
              o o  «-
                 U-  P
              u    a.
             — -a
             -a c .a
              a) ID  3
             o _i a.
               cn

               LA
        I LAOO •—
        »f—CM r-^
             — CM
                                                   O O VO O
                                                   -3" LA PAVO
   — CM  cn r».
   o vo  cn LA
                                             PA O CM
                                             j-  LA-IT
-3-  r^co
co  cn PA
    CM —
                                       -3- OO PA
                                       -3- -3- -3-
-3- vo cn
CM vO CM
— PA
                 U  (U
              c — —
              ID 3 —
              4-1 Q. •—
              in     u
              C <4-  (D
              — O LI-
                              PA
                              OO
                         o oo PA cn o  CM
                         oo P~-OO co oo oo
                         co -3- — r»-vo  LA
                            — LA CM CM  Cn
                                   — CM J-
                          LA —  LA O
                          r-*. oo oo cn
                          cn-T  CM vo
                          OO VO  PA PA
                          — CM  CM CM
                                                                                     OO OO CO
                       cn — —
                      vo co r^
                       •— -3- CM
                                                                                                     VO VO vO
                     O)
                  Q)  C
              c  o —
               l~~ CM (T>
                                       CO LAJf  CM CM —
                                       OO 

                      £°
   o  o o o o
   o  o o o o
   o  o o o o

   O  O O O LA
   O  LA o LA CM
   LA CM —
    I   I   I   I   I
   O  O O O O
   O  O O O O
   o  o o o o

   O  O O LA O
   LA O LA CM —
   CM  —
                                                               0
 D     ID
CH     L.

 U  4-1  C
—  in  a)
.C  (D  O
 O- a)
 ID JI  -C -C
 L.  4J  4J 4J 4J
 O) L.  L. 3 m
 o  o  o o  z  z to 3
u


-------






























00
_]
o
CC
^_
Z
0 —
1- U Ul
Q- 4-1 CD
ro o
O z i-
4-1 3
4J 0
Ol U l/l
c CD CD
N 4-1 o:
in
0
U- U Q
O O 1-
U_ 3
U Q-
•— "O
"U C o
 co



O OO
Z LA

^ — .
<
— - en
,S* CM



O CM
Z LA

^^
^

X1 LA



0 —
z cn
s~
•-' vu
»* CO


o -3-
Z vi;
__^
cC
—• CM
t£ —



-3- VO CM CM
-3- CM co co



.— r-.oo CM
— — CM


oo r^oo —
-3- COvO CM



CM O MS -3-
i— • — . — —



oo en (^ *~~
\f> LA LA J-



1 — M3 O OO
— — CO CM
o — o o->
-3- .3- -3- CM


O — CO O
— •— CM CM


\o r~. •— -a-
— CM



o r^ CM oo
— -3- CM LA



-3" CO CM Cn
CM • — • —


O CO O CM
CM CO CM LA



OO MS — Is*
•— ^— .



OO LA LA 03
CO-3- -3- OO



LA CM LA OA
— CM CM CM
O •— LA t~-
CM CO CO VO


oo LA cn CM
— — CM


oo o r-» LA
*— ^— t—



CM LA
CO CO



00 0
CO CM


— VO
CO CM



h^ LA
CO •—



-3- r-»
LA-3-



-3- r-x
\D CM
vO vO
CO CO


CO —
-3- CM


co cn
^~



o oo r^
CM -3" CM



— CO-3-
— CO —


r~. cn cr\
CM CO —



LA r~ o
— CM —



cn CM o
CO \O LA



CM COvD
CM -3- CM
LA CM r-»
CM LA CM


-3- M3 -3-
i— CO —


•— r^vo
*"* ^~

ro  o lo    —
o
-3-
LU
_J
CD
<







Q
Z
<
_l

Q
LU
h-
<
Z
LU
1
>-
ro
u
i_
0
4-J
in
•x.





\
ro
>
i_
0)
 CO CO-3-.3-CM CM-3-CMVO

O CO CncOvOO OO-3"MDO
ZvO — CM CM CM — CM
	 ^
-  C =
 CD  O -
-Q  a.
 E  v/l
 3  CD
z o:
                     LA r~-
                     CM CM  LAvO
O O^ LA CO
-3- -3- LA CO
O~\OO
• — LA
vo cn CM
LA vO LA
                                                                      o
                                                                      4-1
                                                                      ro
CO
CJJ
o
(J

—
<

*
ro
4-1
O
a.
3
O
l- O
o o
o
c •
o o
— o
+J LA
ro
.— u
3 CD
a. >
O 0
o_
o
o
o
o
o
LA
1
O
O
o
0
LA
CM
O
O
O
O
LA
CM
1
O
O
o
0
o
o
o
0
o
o
!
o
o
0
cT
LA
0
01 —
CD ro
CC. L-
4->
O 4-1 C
— Ul CD
.c to o
a. CD
co -c -n .c
L_ 4-) 4-* +J 4J
C7) L. L- 3 l/l
O O O O 
ro
4-*
00

o
u
4->
i!





o
4-1
^


o
1_
4^
CD
s:
c
o
z
ernmen
>
o
C3

M-
o
E
£
minist
TD
<
4-t
3
0
JC
4-1
5
4-t
ro
i_
4-t
l/l
C
'i
13 C
< 2
O
-C C
4-1 .*
5 5
                                             130

-------
00
—I
o
o
o
CJ

a:
e Pre- Erosion Grading Restrict Sanitation
vation Control (Excavatn) Housing Noise Nonreturn (Refuse) Sign
inance Ordinance Ordinance Code Ordinance Bottles Ordinance Ordinance
0)
i_
r-
-o
 0
4-1
C
(U
-o
«- c
O O
a
• in
O  LA
O CM

0 —
CM LA



O cn
cnoo


LAOO
LA —
~





— CM
vO -3"
r—


O 0
O O
O 0
o o
LA O
CM • —
1 1
O O
o o
o o
0 0
O LA
,—

-3- cn
co r-~
1 —


on on
oo oo


LA O
on o
CM LA





CM CM
CO O
CM vO


0 0
0 O
O 0
O LA
LA CM

1 1
0 0
O O
0 0
LA O
CM —


xO LA Cn \£>
co co r-»oo
i — cn r*^ LA
— I — — CM
CM CM CM CM
r — oo cn co
I"— on LA CM
CO OO LA —
— CM CM CM
— CM o on
CM LA — r-~
cn LA LA OO
cn cn cn on
CM LAVO cn
co • — cn cn
\o o cn r-^
r-~oo oo t~»
CM — on —
cn\o -3- o
— CM CM CM
-3- -3" CM \O
LA CM — —
— — .3- —
CM — — CM
LA on on LA
LA on O LA
cn cn CM cn
OO CO
co o
•~


tO vO
1 — CO


,— ,.
cnoo
— CM





CM r>»
LA CM
CM cn

c
0

cn —
Q) ro
a: i-
4-1
O 4J C
— l/l 
-3- J- 0
r- LA CM
co o cn
oo oo co
— LA —
r-^ r~. cn
~ -3" CM
• — CM • —
. — r- on
O CO 00
-3- on CM
OO CM CM
r^ CM cn
CM
\o -a- CM
cn r^oo
r^ « — cn
oo J- vo
— -f CM
— on r-.
-3- LA CM
cn CM oo
r-~ — oo
cn
— CM
CM LA-3-
on CM CM
CM -3" LA
cn on CM
on cn —
\r> cnco
• —


cn on CM
oo co oo


-3- cn o
r^co r^.
i 	 3" CM





LA CM CO
cn cn CM
— LA cn



0)
a.
1— *•"
c
>~ 
*-> 
o
C3

M-
O
E

O
U-
— LA LA
CO OO CO
i — 3- r~-
CM LA LA
CM vD
on LA LA
co oo r^
cn LA LA
CM vD
— CM O
on CM O
vD LA O
on on on
O CM O
o r-. CM
• — CM
co r*"* r*v
CM -3" —
-3" O LA
CM \O
on cn CM
-3- J- -3-
cn CM co
• — on CM
— cn
LA LA • —
-3- CM ~
— — oo
on cn CM
MD co cn
oo on —
CM


CM LA O
co oo r>-


cn r-. I^N
CM LA-3-
CM VO





cn cn r-.

CM r~.


^_

•— ro
o c
c ro
D s:
O i
CJ • —
> —
1_ O 1-
O C 01
>- 3 -C
ro o 4-1
•z; <.) o

                                                                 131

-------










































CM
.3-

UJ

CD

I—























































































(/I
O
OL
h—
Z
o
o

Q
UJ
1—

^f
z
UJ
1

1
z

o
CJ

C£.
UJ
X
H
O













































— ^ 0 <
4-1 0) C
nj ui ro **
4-1 3 C
C 4) 13 •
ro o£ i- O
i/> ^--0 z
c
U 3 Ul
— 4-1 a; &$
L. 01 —
Ul C 4J .
U O O O
0£ Z CO Z
0)
o <
c
ro * ro eve
— ro c
-o u —
(TJ 5C "O *
i- LU i- o
CJ «-' O Z

a)
u <
c — c
O O ro i*p
.- U C
Ul 4-J —
O C T3 •
1_ Q 1- O
UJ U O Z
1 C  —
QJ U *O •
i_ a i- o
1— ui o z
-a a)
1) O <
c  0 Z
4-t
C
01
-o
>4- C
O 0
a.
• i/i ,-^
O » r-»oo
VJ3 SO ^- PA


tnoo r-»\jj
— •— CM CM

-3- O CM O



— o — o


CM — in o
PA ^~



OO PA PA O


•3* ^" en en
-3- -3- PA CM


— CM CM O
— — CM CM





CM \O PA PA
tn CM CM *—



PA r^. PA en
— ^~



CM — tn CM
PA -3- CM —



OO — -3- OO


-3- ^— en -3~
CM —



VjO PA Un PA



vjO o en oo
PA PA PA CM



CTlOO CM CT\
CM —



in p^ r^ oo
CM cvi in \o







CL O O O
3 O O O
o o o o
u o - « •
o o o o o
o o m o
c -in CM —
O 0 l 1 1
— O O 0 O
4-i in o o o
ro o o o

"D cu o o o
CL > in O tn
O O CM —
O-


oo CM r-» r~
— CM CM vO



r^— in CM
— — CM



o in in JT
CM in in\o


OO P~ O —
CM PA CM

O O CM PA



o o — —


O 00 — CM
^— ,f~



O -31 vO -st


PA PA in OO
•— PA -3- in


in \o if\ en
— CM •—





o o en CM
— — CM in



•^ un \o r^
r— > ^~



PA -3" -3- \O
CM •— CM CA



en r-» PA CM


PAvO VO CM




i— po en -^



oo in in —
— CM PAMD



r^ CM en o
— <— CM



o en in PA
-3- ^y in PA






c
O

CJl —
iu ro
C£ l.

O 4-1 C
•— Ul Q)
jz ro o
O. 4)
ro J: -c jz

CJl l- l- 3 Ul
O O O O 41
a) z z co 3
C3


vO —
PA CM



PA CM
-3- —



oo en
in CM


en r^
vO —

CM O



CM O


CM O
^_



4- O
_»

PA.3-
J- CM


•— -3*
in —





en CM
CM •—



in r^
PA



oo -a-
CM •—



PAOO
PA


PA PA




in CM
*~


-3- •—
PA PA



O OO
-3" r—



cnoo

^~










Ul
3
4J O
ro L-
4-) 4->
OO 01
0 Z
O 1-
1- 4-1 C
4-» 4) O
gs: -z


r^u\r*~
CM -a- •—



in— en
— PA



\o CM -3-
PA \o -a-


O PA PA
CM -a- CM

CM — 0



— — o


r~ PA CM
PH



-4" o^ •—


raoo r*-
CM -3- en


en en o^
— PA —





oo in in
— PA —



0-3-00
— CM



oo PA in
•— PA •—



O PAOO
•— CM


•3" r*^ \o




CM CM PA
~~


O PA < —
PA-3- CM



r^. o —
^— PA •—



WD en CM
in\o in


i_
O
ro L-
4-1 1- O
C 4-J 4-<
4) Ul (0
E " ^
C C. t->
1- — Ul
0) E —
> -o c
O < —
 -0 C
M- 3 < 1
oo 5
jz j: c
E 4J 4-» ^
0 3 3 5
U-
132

-------
5
a.
^
o
Ul    Z
-J    O
CO    —
      Ul
      §
           "!•=
                    QC
                 oi
                    at
           zi2i
                    UJ
   UJ (_J !
_. OiOli
UJ| _>| vi|

wil o' ac10:
< z: -*; zi
              Oi
              zl
                    
                                               fVJ
                                                     o.o o
                                               0;t\|
                                          •rieo'o'oio
                                          rw rsi;  I
                                               »  ,
                                               in  ao
                                                  Z
                                                  o
                                                 )•-•
                                                 lo!
                                                 [Ol1
                                                                   tsi
                                                             •n! (^ oj
                                                             r<1 in
                                                                        co
   O <-> —<
      pg rw
                                                                        03
   to; >O

   nj! rv rx
                                                                           in
                                                                           CO
                                                                           (M
                                                                           •o
1
«-»!uo!oj
Q.
                                                                    - 1
OIOClOC1 _
oi o u; o
oi zj '-e. wo
o|   I
                                                                                      iz

              u> o
X,
a.

u.
                                                                                                    CM
                                                                                                    eg
                                                                                                       ra
                                                                                                    in
                                                                                                    03
                                                                                                       o
                                                                                                       rn
                                                                                                       00
                                                                                                          in
                                                                                                          03
                                                                                                          o
                                                                                                       XIX
                                                                                                             CO
                                                                                                             CO
                                                                                                             U)
                                                                                                             OI
                                                            133

-------





«:
_j
OL, GC
uJ
ys
UJ H-
s
a
3


*
oc
UJ
a
CO
u
UJ
W1
at
a
^i
,,

M

u

«J
„
>• M col -J
f- W| OJ O •
0 ^ H 1 ^
3JJ
z 3
•* ~" ^
-a- z a
o
lij ••• .***
OJ| 0| 0
CM
f«H

"1
PI

^
~4


^











O
o
rnj
00
-*


•a
o



o
-J 0
OSjl



mi o
"*

(s«



•^













o


o












oi o
o

o



o
o


o


03


o












o
0

o



0
u


o


CJ


o
o
0

o o



o
o





o
o


O 0


o


£2
1











o











o


^


0













00,000010.
O! o o oi o; o; o:

























































2T


"1
«n
•H


o
•n
0
— t

o
m

0



rr»












3
« « M X . •. >. UJ
o IA o mj »y «H oj
III I i |i I I •<
O O1 O O1 Oi O O 04
O O O O Oi O O' .
o, 01 o o a o1 m at

K«KW«««.UJ
o( o o mi oi mi f\i ai
S
llll

1
1
CLJLU
Ct, f_
ia 
"^

o
V*















u
ac

LL
O
>J"
o
1-1


0
I
~4

O
rr»

rvi


O
^














0
oc
u.
z;

2
C
































































IM,
Z
UJ
ac
r-

-------
                               o — CM vo — •—
                               LA vo LA -3- -a- -3-
                               UT\ — CM VO LA LA
                                  — OA vo — - -a-
                                           — CM
-a-  LA CM on
rA-3- LA OA
LA VO  CM  —
oo -a- -a-  o
                                                          r--. vo vo
                                                          LA c-A-a-
                                                          CM — —
                                                          — —- LA
                                                                                               cn-^-cn
                                                                                               rA-=r m
                                                                                               O OO vO
                                                                                               — CA CM
                            OA       O CM CTivO CM  CM        O~» CM — —       vO vO O       on LA CM
                            LA       vO r-~ LA LA LA  LA        -a- LA vO LA       vO -a* vO       -a~ LA LA
                            vO       vO rAvO O vO LA      -4- •— CO PA       CT»Or^       CO rA LA
                            cr\          — CAOO -a- ~      CM r^-vo OA       CM f~- on       PA CM en
                            LA                   — CA      ___„       _. CM _       ,— -4"
      CO
<£.    —
                                     -3" — CM CM CM —
                                                             OQLAraO
                                                                                CMO\rr\
                                                                                CM — —
                                                                                CM
                                                                                               LA-
                   1_

                   <
                            O
                            CM
                                     O VO CO LA — CM
                                     LA LA rr\ CM CM •—
                                     LA O rA LA CT» CM
                                        — CM m LA r«.
                                              oo o
                                        — CM — —
                                              o r^
                                       -3- oo LA CM
                                                                                — OO CM
                   — LAOO
                   \O O ro
                                  CM r^ CM
                                  CM — —
                                                                                         CM -3- OO
                                                                                         vO rA
LA
-=r
CQ
<
      LU
        •—
LA\D vo vo
                                       VD -* CM CT\
                                       -a- o oo LA
                   — LA LA
                   LA PA O
                   — ff\ CM
                                                                                               LAvO LA
                                                                                         O PAOO
                                                                                         v£> on rA
      o
      LU

      a.
      o
      a
>-


O
                      <     —
               O OO •— CM CM CM
               — — vo -a- oo o
                        •— CM VO
CM r»-3- CM
LA CM r*-.vO
CM CA CM CM
                                                                         LA CM OO
                                                                         o\  CM
                                                                         — LA PA
                                                                                               cr\ on
                                                                                               CM
                                                                                                     vo
 LA
(D
*3 Q)
Q. >
0 0
CL.
O O O
O O 0
O 0 O
O O O
O LA O
LA CM —
O 0 0
o o o
o o o
O 0 O
LA O LA
CM —
O O
o o
0 0
O LA
LA CM
0 0
0 O
0 0
LA O
CM —
Q
fl\
V
ce.
O 4->
•—  -c
Uii
•^J
O) L.
o o
Q) Z
U
,_
nj
L.
4-1
C
(U
0
.C -C
4-1 4J
^8
z to


4J
I/)
£
(U
Q.
1-
4-1
0
U.

c
— (0
03 J3
U L.
4-1 3
C XI
(1) 3
o to

jpendent
v
•o
c
c —
(U U
0 3
CJ O
U- 1
O L-
o
1- -
C (U
O 4-1
o o
                                                            135

-------
                        ro
                                             oo
                                                     LA 00 LA
                                                              — CM CM CM
                                                vO QO
                                                LA CO
                                                r-» CM
                                                vD CM
                                                      cnoo oo
                                                      covo co
                                                      CM r% o
                                                      CM -3- CM
         o.
         o
         o
         o
         o
               a
               c

            <0 '-o
           -O  C
            E  O
            3  a

                LA O  LA
       O O CM —
       o_
                                                  c
                                                  o

                                                  en    —
                   o 4->  c
                   — w  a>
                   _c ro o
                   a. a>
                   en L.
                   o o
                   0) Z
                   o
                                                                  L.  3
                                                                     U)
                                                                     3
                                                                     4-1
                                                                     (0
                                                                     4-1
                                                                     OO


                                                                     o
                                                                                     O

                                                                                     4-1
                                                                                     0)
                                                                            c
                                                                            o
                                                                             ro  L.
                                                                          4-1 U  O
                                                                          C 4-1 4-1
                                                                          0| in  ro

                                                                          C C 4J

                                                                          aJ 'i .-

                                                                          o < •-
                                                                          C3     E
                                                                             4-1 T3  C
                                                                          «*- 3 <  3
                                                                          o o     o
                                                                             x: jc  c
                                                                          E 4J 4J JrJ

                                                                          o 5 5 5
                                                                     136

-------











































f^^
-3-
UJ
^
00

1-













































>-
t-

CJ

>-
03

o
III
0£
O
1-
z
o
2:

>-
— 1
/v
^
=J
C5
LU
a£

,£
LU
a:
<
_i
z
LU
Z
z
o
t£.
>
Z
LU
















OS
LU
1 	
5
3











LL!
C3
oi
LU
^
LU
CO





o>
c in ^-« m
— -O < ON
U L. 	 '
o CD a*
4J -a
— c
C CO • fN
O 4-* O -3"
2: co z -3-
m
o>-Q— ~ -3-
••» (Q ^-** .flf
4J -a
a. c
O CD •
-O 4-> O
< to z
01
c in *-^ r~
.- -0 < OO
O CO if
4J -0
O 4-» O —
£ tO Z UN

in
m "^ *^^k sO
C L. < ON
•^ CD *"^ UN
4J ^
Q. C
O ID •
13 4J O
*-^ /.« "^
-•*. ** • *6—










LU
to
_
0
z












_
<






a> *« ^^ en
c -o < rf\
•— L. ^«^
1— flj d^P
0 T3
4-1 C
— CO • vO
c 4J o t^.
o to z
z
in
Ol "O ^"^ \O
C 1- < ON
4-> TJ
O- C
O 10 •
T3 4-> O
< to Z
on
c in--^ so

^ ^ *-i -*
o CD ^P
4J "D
~ c
C CO • SO
o 4-> o r~-
z to z —
in

c i-^ O
•— (0 *— ' CM
4J *U
a. c
O ID •
T3 4J O
< to z

O O OO OO UN —
CM O OO ON ON ON
^— »—



SO — CO UN ON-3"
— CM SO O CM
— CM

UN >— CM VO UN UN
"~ — CM






fN UN -3" -3" SO •*
OO OO ON ONOO OO


U\. 	 3- UN SO SO
— cry rx. CM so
— CM


sO <*NsO O sO UN
— moo -3- —
^ C^N








UN c«Nso -3- CVN r>.
r"- fN-3- UN CM fN
^_



nN-3- sO OO c*N CM
— — ff\


^t" c^ r*\ c^ ^O ^^
— r-— ON o
O^- UN —
^* •— ^— »«"


-3- — OO r*N

f»* ^w MV *~








CM OO UN O
•^f ro f?\ -^*




vO — UN-9-
— CM — CM


OO UN «*N O
C*N UN «-3- cst

r.
CM t-^ ON
r- CM —








UN sO O
-3" f*N -3"




ON o r^
• — 3- —


. UN
I>«OO CM
r-.

CJN F^ C3


CM -3" OO
SO f*N





in
  UN
 >D
•—  U
 3  0)
 Q. >
 O  O
O.
O  O O O O
O  O O O O
o  o o o o

O  O O O UN
O  UN O UN CM
UN  CM —
 I   I   I   I   I
O  O O O O
o  o o o o
o  o o o o

O  O O UN O
UN  O UN CM —
CM  —
  4J 4->
 01 L.  u  3 in
 O  O  O  O (U
   C  CD
                                                                         o  3  z:
              <4-  I  —
               O  «-  O
                  O  C
               E  ^  3
                                                                                    (U
i-  ID  o
o z:
                                                                                o o
                                  137


-------








Ul
t-
>



uu
£
u


a
UJ
t—
a.
z a



t~
v*a{ tj
a




ec! mi
t/> a
|~
^j *^
^ C3
UJ
1 "
J— CU
o O
< Q.
O-
£ z
a
_i
z °
«,


& >.
U -J •
C£ ! ^£. i LJ
CL! LJ

(*
0
UJ
-7
O
a:
o.
tij




>•
_j
z
o

S •-1 >~:i/l
cr> z: -i
•zr z 03
UJ § g
<_>**
fr"* Mt
a:.. -»
as > a. O •
< z Z
I- UJ o
CC.
O
Lu
to
h-
UJ "-
3E 0
UJ
a: •
— o
cX z
UJ
CC
^















.J£
Ij







QL


0
Z
»•<
>—
at
;O




















Q.
01
oe

















0
z





-»
4
*•*

















































































0
r-


ro
fM
fxiM


fM


O
rg




ao

co
03



o
fM


£
fM





to
m
0
•-«





WO
UJ
t-t
1-
•^
o

-I
_J
^

•I
^
^M»
0
t-











































































































a.
o
•o


•O




o


0





ro

fO




0
«H


-4






o
•H









~i*
Q
~*i-4
*O|f^


•M
<-4



o


0





•o

^^




rn
fO


•0






CO
r-^










•H
-r






r^





fO

fM




>»•
CM


2i






CO
in








o o
Olo
•& f"*




•T'^O
-33; JO
i"^


-^


«H





•O

CO




ro
fO




fM


•Q





co

0
fM



O
fM


-O fM






o*






•T
mi-o
»4







0
o o o
fM







fN.
f"


, 0
uvo »n
010 inio m rsji— «
Z «H m: CMJ M^
0 Ol | | 1 |

1
>^ O ! O ''in : o- in* fM
u.u
o-l
rM

•^i
1


M^'




— ; -^m
(M O



z
3











































































































z
o
1-4
o
UJ
CC.

\J
1-*
•M
CO


fO
00
iw4


ro


(»•





m

-0




fM
•H


r-






ro
CM
CM













^
ao


-O
in
fM


fM


in





o
•H

O
ro



tn



in






~o
tj
ro









j
 m
^C <%i ^
QL'UJ
^1 J_
CC I
O CC

•c
^•^
cj ^j o
UJ
o
z

rg
CO


o^
o
H





ro
m
fM


















(/>
U Ul
2' ^
1
J5










































































































UJ
a

H-

^»
i-
M«
U
"•-
a.
f«


OJ
21
•T
r»-


•-«
»f
— (


r-4


r-4





>0

rM




^
•-«


0
ro






O
tJN
rH















_J
«»
^
2
1 ; i
ro
•o


>o
•<•
CO


ro


^>
_H




"

co
ro



,s.
fM


CO
sr
t-4





\Q
•^>
in















CO
^-


•o
fO
fM


•M


tn





ro

co
ro



GO



rM






fM
^j
CO











l«
Z
UJ
O
z z
25
/v
CO
=?
Ul
a.
0
2^
O «" M
1











































































































K-
UJ
^r
^
QC
o
CO


O
O
^J


in
O|00
(^


f\j


.f\





(P

rv)
CM



y.



rM






C»
in
04









_J

uj'o
>
o
0

u.
'-J
x
(X
a
u.
Z

Q
u
•1
•*f


r\J


^
»<




CO

(J
^0



^-,
CM


>*•
r-
.— t





CO
m
r*.







Q^
UU
o
<5
Z

£

^j
i— i
~4ltn
•o


r«»
f-i



•*


-H





fM

•o




^.
«-<


"""






CO
fM













Z
O

(/)
vo
t£» i ^J ) ***
Oi - f ! •**


-------
s








£
1*4
 OC
Z
m y*
*^ C3
£
i— v
CO »*
1- -*
o ®
< i»
0. 0.
X
™" z
_J 0
1 s

z <->
S CD
3
£~ tx

Z
ec °
g
u
5 a
Q(
•M •
Ul Z
*
C
§c
















UJ
is
a
2


t-
o
01
-J
U
«
Q.


l/>
fr—
U
UJ
~>
O
OC
a
at
t^
<(
9
M
ae
a.

VJ
























o
UJ
H-
a.
O
a



5
jC
UJ






?•
J
z
U


V"»
U
LU
"7
0
06
a.
z

OC
O
a.
01
















«t


44?


*
o
«
9f

*
U
.jr

,3


99


«
a
z
<


M


*
O
Z


^
•— •









































































in
•0


H


03

O|




(T)
•4,


rn




v
01


f*




^
«M










^
s^
O
o
«•
o

Ul

oc
UJ
a
OJ
in


n
r-»


O

o




o
01


m




09
01


f*




m
01








o
o
0
o
OJ
•o


f)
n


O

0




en



r»




in
01


(*>
•H



n
in








o
0
0
o
o m
in
1





0









o
o
o
o
m

I
o
o o
00
(H i.
olin
aim
1
01
o



o



Q

o




o



U




o



o




0









o
o
o
in
OJ

I
o
o



0



o

o




o



o




o



o




o









o
<2
o
o
«4

1
6
OIO
o
»
o

o
•
in

o



o



o

o




(5



0




0



0




o









o
o
o
in


l
o
o
in
•
OJ

o



o



Q

0




o



Q




O



O




O












o
0
m
•
01

ae
Ul
a
z
9

































































































Z
a

LI
**<
OC

VJ
04
^
a.
•«*
ae
C
a
in
r-


f»
OJ


O

o




.J.
^4


in




»4
*H


>J>





rn













(••
^
«g
LU
J^
K
a
z
b
r-


1-4
(t>


O

o




CD
-4


07




-4
-4


m





'C










J
ae
H>
z
a)
^

ji
^
a
z
CO
r-


ao
en


N

•H




ao



<4>




N
-4


•O




0»
*

















z
h-
C
in
OJ


CO



«

P^




>o



ol




•0
*o


^
01



OJ
m


















w>
a,
X





































































































CO
""^
«/
>-
<
»-
CO

U
ae
t-
OJ
X
^,
4


fs.
^)


o,

f>J




-r
-*


in
-H



n
I^J


m
OJ



o>
o

















0
ae
at
X
„,
f-


r~
m


o

o




CO



^




^
OJ


_4
»^



0]
in













O
QC
!••
01
X
Z
U
z
































































































*—
z
UJ
X
z
lu
>
o
o

U.
U
X
QC
VJ
U,
GO
FN>


03
f>


O

o




OJ
r-4


•O




O
iH


in





*




o
rf\


m
m


rn

OJ




t\)
r«4


00




in
n


•n
OJ




-o




a:
o
OJ
•*•


m
fO


o

o




r— 1
^4


in




r—
v-4


CO




xO
•f






^
2 Q
L L_
«2 <


c
^

^IW
3
O
X

!2
•z
—
X
£? «c
^j,

X
f-
»
Tf
U
we
5
                             140

-------
to



ui
o
2
"    i
t*l    ^*
co    o
.<    "^
                   a
                   z
            jj
                      cf.
                      LU
                      a.
                      o
               a

               'to
               H-
               O
               LJ
                      a

                      a.

                      o
                3
                £
         O
             JJ
               OJ
            O
             J
               'JJ
               a
         UJ
             jj
               at

               ^

               a
                         CO
                         •r
ro


^»-
                         rn
                         O
























a.

3
•J

^
o
i—
«.
o
u.
LJ
a
o

u

in
CM
r-4

m
(N
r-4

*
fM
rH


-'M
M


Q

•r



o
o
(t
o
o
in
'41
aj
>
o

a

(j

rH
f"
.n

*
CM
CM

*
to
xO

«.
CM
INI
a

u

-

o
o
•J
o
n
I
a
CJ
3
o
n
fM

fM
r-4
IM

^
*
CO

^
"*"
-o

«
!*•
m
"
!
•*
33
O

0

(s.
•H
O
o
"3
Ci
i-O
^
1
o
o
^
'J
0
rH

•r
(M
IM
"
0
•*"
N

49

^

as
O
O
'^
3
n

I
o
rs
0
n
CM


n
"*
'»
(M
n
N
0>
m
n
V
.j,
ro
33
:M
ro
«*•

r-l
n
H.

N
-a
CO
•T
~4
3
O
•^
(^
N

1
-^
"3
3
*H
»

U

w

O

o

o

C3

O

o

a

o


^

a
o
o
o
o
r-4

i
O
o
in



o

0

o

o

p

Q

O

o

'J

a


o

o
o
o
3
•n


I
o
n
•N



O

fj

o

0

o

o

o

0

0

'O
o

o

o



o
o
tJ^
tM

•e.
JJ
CJ
^
3

                                                                    in o
                                                                    o 
-------
(/>



UJ


UJ



t-
«/:
—i   z
CD   O
<   tt
     o
     o
o

CO

o
             o
                3
                   O
                           o
                                   in
                                      O
                                        n
                                         o
                                      CM
                                                   o
                                                 O
                                                         0
                                                     142
                                                                   •o
                                                                   M
                                                                   n
                                                                         r-J
                                                                                rg
                                                                                   ••r
                                                                                   in
                                                                                              O
                                                                                              O
                                                                                            *__»•

                                                                                            ££l
                                                                                            rv-- La.1

-------


















1-
z
UJ

UJ
S
H*
c/>
t
a.
36
t
w*
c*> Z
u\ uJ
UJ Z
_| Q
CO (£.
|_ > ^r
5 ^
NJ
V« IM4
H H-
^0 rH
0 0
u.
0
„, 1
*" lit
y ^
UJ
^ ^ i
> -«
K
'-1

jj
->
w-4
(-
'JJ
>
,_
3
O
ijj
X
jj




>•
3
321




t/5
O.
_>
a

6





£3
•-U
t—
a
CD
a
"*
















.4


Aa


•
a

?

•
a
^
^

•»*


«
!_J
•^
^


#*

a
*c.


•<

^


•
--"J
z






«^
^
v»

























































































og
CO


rH
a
rH


C7N
^

n
in
rH


n
"vl

rH
P-



0
•4"

m
-^
r~^



TJ
-H

•H
H
r-
tj

-J
-J

U

m
•r


fi




-4
fw

m




^
-H

rH




*>
<3}

-O





-r
"*

•H








(^









O
a
0
•3
a
j^
i
o
o
o
3
*n
eg

r^
-T


a




^n
o

— <
•H



M
-H

'(\|




m
'-n

y>





'J^
rt'

0








r-
rH








•^
O
o
f.
O
m
T


O
i\J



V"
•f

f^
•g



N
M

AJ
•H



^H
^n

CO
N




'f\
—1

•-O








in
^n








o
o
o
o
o
rH
I

J
C3
0
>
•^

-*>
rH







^
P»








O
o
o
o
-n

l
o
o
o
in
r\j


r-
iM


_4
>j-



O
<•

^
>0



-n
>M

TJ
•"0



r>J
^

-n
•-o




a)


^>
rH







«y
in
rH







^J
O
o
-n
N

1
o
o
o
o
-H


O



o




o


3




o


0




o


u





o


CJ








o









o
o
o
o
—1

1
o
o
o
iA



O



O




3


-3




O


O




o


0





•3


..J








O









o
CJ
o
m


1

o
m
;NJ



O



o




o


o




o


o




o


o





u


<_>








o












o
o
m
»
-\j

i ii
a
z.
3






























































































































2
a

UJ
at

u
r*l
Ji
0.
**
ij
! J
01
o
rn
m


m
rH



m
^

f».
H



m
•"n

;T)
rH



m
m

^
-H




'X>


n








o
•r













H-
i/>
o
rH


CO




>$•
N

rvl
rH



^0
rH

00




CO
?n

ON
rH




CO


-T








O
^^










,J
-^
t-
Z

U

X
c&
O
^c

fS.
rH


3)




CO
(<1

CO
rH



;T|
«*•

O
-N



MJ
m

(N.
r-(




»H
— '

m








r-
\x

















X
5
u
00

o
^


rg
C-



O
•0

^0
o
rH


r-
-^

o




m
j-\

m
ON




•o
rH

'J*
r>j







CO
r-
tH

















!/5
aj
3j
































































































































UJ
a
H-

^.
i-

a
>s
C£,
^-
ai
Z
r-
m


03
rH



g\
m

CT>
CVJ



M
^



'M


-O
rH



'M
*n

-H
-N



*
isj

0s
rH



m
'M

,n
-H
1



—1
-H

r—








~o
>y











r-
-r
UJ
CJ
,^
I]
•J.
ii

^
l-H





























































































































r—
Z
UJ
3E
2
UJ
>
O


a.
•j
3-
:£
o
a.
CO
rg


>}•
rH



^
oa

rH
rH



0
rvj

m
•H



•a
'n

CO
rH




O
rH


3;
-^
^
tj
•|
*
^


rH
,N
rH



m
•H

m
en







•aj
*T
i.*NJ







,-^
OJ
CJ5
^
-a
^r
r
^i
»-i
'->
^
^j
o

03
rH



-------
UJ



I-



I-


O.
-a-     z
un     ui


SJ     I

£     |
       oe
       ui

       ui

       >
       ui
       oe
                isl
                0
                   I/I
                   0
                    -0
                      .'J
                u
                       a
                    ••y <
                   a
                                m
                                !M
                                CO
                                CO
                                00
                                CJ
                            I
                                         30
                                         O
                                         O
                                            in
                                            CN)
                                            •X)
                                                o
                                                  m
                                                   o
                                                      O
                                                      a
                                                      o
                                                      o
                                                      o
                                                      o
                                                      o
                                                      o
                                                            O
                                                            o
                                                            o
                                                            o
                                                               o
                                                               a
                                                               O
                                                                  O
                                                                  O
                                                                  o
                                                                  'J
                                                               CJ
                                                                               rn
                                                                                 CM
                                                                                  -0
                                                                                  0
                                                                                     in
                                                                                     •M
                                                                                              "W
                                                                                                 CM
                                                                                                          in
                                                                                                          m
                                                                                                           rt)
                                                                                                           CM
                                                                                                    CC
                                                                                                    o
                                                                                                    I- a:
                                                                                                    < o
                                                                                                    C£. \~

                                                                                                    in
                                                                                                                 fO
                                                                                                                 33
                                                                                                                 m



                                                                                                                 m
                                                                                                                 m
                                                                                                        u.

                                                                                                        ^  J
                                                                144

-------
UH-|
—I <~l
,' **
oz'a
»-4 .±j




r-t
CO


r*«
-o
Z' '*"' *^i •
^> -5
^
- a a. ia ff.
a?


sr


_ — < 3!' C7; ro
C3 ^J t«4 p— • JQ t^J
2 «•* i •S: • i fM
|_ — ^' -*i r-», -»4
1^ — '
W x
5
z
in —
in
*A
I



m .* "-
-j a: 0
Z
o

( .




f— -»
DC <





eo o • o *•"
< I- •
*~ 3 a
OC -,
0 Z
o
Ul
w
0
a.

^











a.
jj
cc






























O
f»
0






co
UJ
i
j
s
>-










a.

r-
r»

0
m
m
o
Mt


3i
O
e>

a
»^
i—
**
-3
a.
•_)
a.
o

fO
30
m


f-4
n

1-4

0

03
co


fM
f-4
o
•o

o
o o
CJ
!
r* r\i
^
<0
p-4

rM
^
00
30
-
3
03
~*
CO

fM
CO
0
*
CO
-4
in
in
pi> -^o ; r**

o
CM
o
in
o
0

a

0

0
o


o
°

o

o

o
o


0
O

O

o

o
o



o o o o o
O:O O O O! O:
o! o; o o -n • o mo
o oim O1 mi 
O

fM
-H
1
1 1 f ' 1
m
^
O O; O O, O- O O fM
o o o o a o o;
Oj CU Q. O1 C? O

in
CM

o: O: in o in
o
r-4

in


fM


—4





m, cc
^M



o
z
3

           OB
              CO
fM

fM -*
              -O
              ao! i
                 •a
        UJ
           o
                   HI
                           in
                           CO
                         U «l
                                 oo
fnlr-i
   
-------











eg
O

CC
UJ
t-
^
*
<
— to
CC t_
o ,,,
I—
1^ ...
QC Z3
o or

^ **
— u.
0 O
•
^5\ ea W
U\ HJ ^^
LU 0 Z
_J UJ <
eo to 3
£ < §
«-4
UJ

U.
o
UJ
0. >

£ X

























1
z
Q


K
UJ
X
h-
O




cO
UiZ
u
CO


ft?


*
o
2

03


3?
QC •-«
UJ h-
-5 U

•
UJ UJ (J
v>


1
UJ
QC

z



0
z
Z
aa


ef

HHI
oc'z
o
u.


o
z
u
••vl



l/>
1-4 t—
a'1-"
•J, 21
!_. ^*
3 UJ
CO

o
UJ

o
a.
*^

















_
a.
i
CC.
^J
H»
4
QC
O
Z
















f
C3
k£

|
O


in
*N
p^


n
o
t>l





to
U)
••»
s
o

-J
_J
<(

*
-J
«^
^»
o
»•













































































































a.

o
o

z
0
tw«
v—
o


tM




fO











O
O
«
O
o
in

oc
C5' *^J
a
o
a
>
a

o



o





r-
-0


OJ




0



0





r^
-O


r
^


^
r4




C7^
J
—4




NQ
*T


^0
^



tM
"*>


>r
t^




o
-<3


IT)
*4?



in
0
*"^






o
o



o





o



o




o



0





0



o




o








o
O 0 0 0
o o
oio
o|\n
•*t\
i t
o o
in
«M

I
«3 OjOjO O
ty
••4

t
O
o



o





o



0




o



o





o



o




o








o
o
o
in


i
o
O O OlO O O!O
O



O





0



o




o



o





o



0




o











o
o
in
•
IV

o ojo 0,0 o mice
Hi W •>! k! » >H »l UJ
o O;O in o T*
in o vnifsi

^•4


0*





N
m


vn
(Ml tM



^.
tM


»-4
r-4




CA
vn


i*.
tM



*
-T












1-
t/>
^c



^
Oj


tn
r^




>0
»
tM



0
^


1*
1-4




CO
vn


in
tM



m
vj"
















X
V—
O 3C1 X O
O
UJ
o
o; o
z

z

o
to


^_
•^
U
•s»
a
a.
^»
UJ
Z
•O


















j
<
uc
1—
•o
•-4


—4
'M




^"
m


^>
^«



^
tr>


ao
•r




O


O
CO



»
tM
i-4













co



f>





O
m


0
!M



in
^>


^
••4,




0
m


a

a
o

u.
tj

I
QC
0
u.
r-



•g-





"4
^n


£7>
tM



O
^M


i-4
»-4




r*^
m


w
tM



in
vn









-I
u
2
^5
O
U
•1
cc
a
m
«••<


— ^
oj




>0
f*l


F*4
'-TV



rg
•^


o
^o




in
o


ro
V



CM
"*
P^






at
UJ
0
z
«l
3£
1
^j
>-*
O
Z
> o
< 0
zo
1
OJOjO



o





in
p%*


CO




0
in



-------
in
OQ
_j
«a
a.
»H
U
*-«
Z
a
a.
>
00 h-
<£ -I
< —

<
I



















uc,
(J
*•
Q
-U
l/]
t^
a.

x:
_>
«
QC
Q
r~
<1
O
z:
0
2
fr«<
I—
Qt
a
LU
a













„

r


^
— <




m
rg












o
o
o
*
o
a
in
UJ
a
(O
-o

!-
-H




rg
m


07





in
rg










O
O
O
•
0
o
1
0
0
o
o
rg
«\
v

03
«J-




oa



^





fN
«n










a
a
a
*
o
o
o
o
a

00

o»
f-4-




r^
*M4


o
•«:




o>
m










o
§
•
0(
V
0
a
o
a
in



o





o



o





o











o
o
o

0
^^
o
in



o





o



o





o











o
o
o
•1
.n
rg
1
o
o
o
°
o


o





o



o





Q











0
§

0
a
o
m
a


a





o



u





o











o
o
o
w
m
o
in
1
o


f




cr



*f





•7
^"











_,
^
CENTR
X
s
z
m
r-

m
tf\




i**
r^


m
«•<




CO
*y














X
I
r-
o

N
fNJ




ft^
f*1


tH
•H




"1
f^














t^
i







































































TATUS
1/1
CC
UJ
5C
in
t>-

o
oo




in
r^f


-0
rg




•0
O















UJ
at
^
ao

•O
•^




f*>
^Mj


f*»





w>
in













0
(X
H-
UU
Z
z


































































H*
2
u.
S
or
c
a
U-
c
at
Ul
"i
03
03

«J-
%J"




'NJ
M<4


vQ





O
in





a
c
h
<
a

^
•2

1

-
_
J^

>0
•T




CT
rg


tr
•M




in
\fj






>

C
: o:
- c
\ L.
' p^
- <
: ct
• i-
: <^
> —
: z
§
I
*~
rg
oo






3O
wi


CO





•T
^*














U
|
                                 147

-------









ac
Q

ac
LU
|_
^
*
5
o co
r™ |M







1
z
o
o

ac
ij
JC
UJ
co


I
^ V»| JJ


ac
UJ
X
o



CO
.£
u
1— 1
^M
tj
03


V?

,
O

03


9*


I
LUJ •—>
*



i3
o LUiqe Z
2 ->
H 2
z oc
0 U.
oo " o
Ol UJ
Ul O
-JO Z
m ui «i
H= = 3

U »/)
Ul
o

u.
o
Ul UJ
OL >
>• <
i- x




















ry
«•*.
a
**•

a
•^
~yp
<£.
O
IM


Zlco
>*^ H»
Oji-t
f y
•"• ^
J
CO


o
LU
co
o
a.
^
"-1




















.jj
a
3

ac
o

<[
JC
a
*




















*
00


&r


rj
^

33

if



a
z




33























































































CM
•4


•*



in
*T


in
*•!



cn
ro


•H
•-»



fM


r*
fmf




cn
«*>.








co
LU
IM
V-
z
^3
a
u

_j

^

•
.j
^
i»
o















































































































a

o
ac
o

2J
O
»•«
1^
«5
co
— 1


CM



'4}
rf)


•f




<3
fO


^




5


f*»





»H
•>*4














o
0
o
«w
o
o
in

-Jl QC
Oi UJ
0-j>
a
o
in
?M


tN



(50
ji"\


rq




CO
(TJ


f*l




CO


m





09












o



0



o
o
r-l

•4"




in
fM


f«4




0
in


r^





•f












0 O
O|O
0 0
O



O



O
sr


4-




o
rt\


ro




o


in





O
r*











O
o
o
W •) W
O O O
o m
in
I
CM
|
CJ ' ^3
o
«^
1
0
o



0



Q



o




o



Q




0


(J





C9












o
o
0
•l
o
m

1

O



O



Q



o




o



o




o


o





o












o
0



0



o



o




o



o




o


C3





o












0
00
o o
•1 •
f\'' O
CM ^4

1

1

o



o



Q



0




0



^J




o


o





Q












0
0
o
d
in


1
o
o



o



o



o




0



o




o


o





o
















o
o
in
•i
CM
0 O O O 0 O'O
o o o o O'Oimlac
•>,•»•<»;••. »4 •» uj
CD C5 cy, mloim
>n o in
i
CM

0<



(M a


z
3














































































































z
o.

o
LU
Q£

VJ
M
X
a.

0



o



o
>0


rr\




O



^




0
•a-


<\i





in


















Lw
i/)



r*}





*y














f
^
QC

Z
UJ
u

I
t—
y>| ng* flg
a
UJ
o
o



0



>0
^f


-o




CM
o


GO




en
•o


u*





m
f«4





















X
t_
~3
^•
CM


C»>



vQ
CO


^




w



*p4




«M


en





»*i
*"4






















k^
co
0 u; o uj
z
n*



















































































































CO
^
^
r



>o
^»


tM
»-4



in
ro


QS




in


^*
f^




*Q
fM





















O
2C
f*
JJ
X
0



o



fn
•^


f>





CM


(M




5


m





^»


















o
oc

LU
j;

2^
a
z













































































































^«
z
UJ
jr
Z
ac
UJ
>
O
o

u.
u

3C
2C.
U
a.
o



o



(*1
CO


in




^
_<


•^




0
in


^





4j







_
CM


*



rvi
ro


•^




r-
m


fN»




ut


0
**4




^
*"4






0£
0
<- aL
o



o



o
in


^




co
m


ff\




o
in


•r





co










3 o
^ rf
CO S
— 1-
z co
»- ^B
I-
< z:
o

K
^
O
X
h-
•^
2
^
Z
_y

X
1—
v-l
•*
u
z
^J
z
3
148

-------









UJ
5 -J
0 <
§ 0.
1
z
a
u

(X
UJ
o
IK.
3

*-
—
•^
ac
UJ
Q
•X
«/>


M


I
U
Z
Ie «*
(*
Ol-iS

^* (-JI
"-*;

S •-•! UJ
z'ui1 >
UJ 3
X X
UJ I
§ <
ac. a
5 u
0 <
a,x
! to














•*!




0j
o
z
<


! I*1

H
>x
*H
0 Z^Zj •



1- 3! < Oil Oi
IA «/> *
w
-I O
m —

*~ ^

"* a
a:
0 t
" 5
ui Z
UI
u
z
•—
^^
*5
2;

^
O




I| 0

























o
2;
»H
H-
/^
O
a
ac



















•-•
*4


O

o







«0
i-4







o

O



O




r-
O*


ao
m


m

|>




^
QH


CO
CO
rg

m

in
<-4






r»
>rjo
OJ









at;
ooooino^mo . J »;..<•, w .. at
ojo o
> in oj in
o
tM
1
tr\ oi m
eg -4




oj a


z
3
I 
O1 'W
I1






















































































LU
a.

H-

§

IT)



in




,,.
O^


"O
(*•»
*H

Sf

r»







co
oo











1-
z
a*
d°
5=oi
vj ocl «3au
QJ \— OC. LU
cc| ^ 2 a
f-IUJ T5lZ

r














































































~y?
LU
y
2;

OJ



m




•r
*J»


r-
••4*
OJ

*

o
-H






OJ
-Q
oj








- 1

i-4



r-l
«H



•«
O*


rn
H^
{««

m

en
r*






fl
^
!»•






C£
LU
O

o



o




0
o
— 1

OJ
fO


o

0







OJ
n










Sis l Z! *t Z





O
0
u.

z
S
u.
O
a: o
i ••«
•-•it/)
O "-"
^. f.
>- 31 x
ot« u
UI Z
1
U
o
0

o



o




o
o
i-4

m
oj


a

o







W1
OJ










O

>-t
\—
iJLI
LU
Z
3

H

O



O




o
o
•H

r-



o

o







r-






0
z

1—
UJ
LUl
2

Z
O
V-
.1
a
ail
CX
149

-------



£
QJ
z
o
CC -J
2:
u
or
d
-*j
«siw
eel
iu an
Q Q t
*S*-» U
Is


*i
«• «*£ f"*j ***)*
> c^ ui
||| **H ^
-H
UJ H <"|UJj
I 2j 01 > •
*~ ^
UI *
o
oc _i
0. 2






m

=0







sQi
QO



CJ ^C C3I
a; x; -d

^
.
55 a] >^! uj
Q {jj }-»j |-4
S JS |

oe u.
o 0

UJ '
> a
i z
Ul
o
—
^^
£
I
=}
o
o
























•^*
o
z



s
t^
t—
tx.
o
a
UJ
(X









«^
<
^^






































J
r^j
•H



CT1









1





O






>O'
•H






VI








H
^<
^
U
•«*
•
-J
1-
a
*-





































a.
c
cc
o
z
a
„
a
^

^


f^
-0

^

^


GO
so
-H
f-< f\j




o*
04

"•





«r
(^











o
o
•l
o
o
in
UJ
CL)>
qu




ao


ca





^.
(N










o
0
o
o
o
^1
1
o
o
•o

rn


m
ao

•f




tj
rH

m





<\
tn










in

m


n
c^
o
:n




(\J


•-t





o











o

0


tj>







%2


«





o











o1 o o
c> 0:0
O

O


o

o





o


»





o











o

o


C7







O


o





o











o o
0 O
o
o

0


o

o





o


o





o
o


o

0





c^


0





o




















o
0



































o1 o a o. o o
CX 0 0
tni o xi
i T i
O| 00
o o o
OjO
o!o
«n
n oi m
0|^
1
IX

tX
OJ;
Qt


































2

-0

<\


*^
cr>
f\
f)




rn


rH





Ul
rr











oi
UH-
X! «
a aj


<\


f^
CO

ro




O^


^





in
•4-











3
(X
H-
Z
Ul
"
<3

(*1


rq
O
O
^




O
_

in





(0
J

1


rH
CO




J
o


r-4
CO
r-
07




rr^
«"H

•4-





P.
O












O
H-
LU
£

o












CT>

^


I/*
UJ
or>
<*)




(M


-





•T
•T







"-
I o ^
Q < o
25 QC 1—

z;
z
uJ z:
>S
s<
J5
31
^
ADMINIS7
WN
X
"
U
Z
§
150

-------

                  a
               01,01
               o,'o
      t     S
      is     rti
      o

      o
   a x
             <
             a-
^u    %_/     "~^ i ^*
-i    u.     z  r
03
<    Ul

H    §
      O

      a:
     UJ
     a.
o.
O
                  a.
                  01
                  e£
                           in
                           in
                           00










a

o
o

z
o
»— *
H-


a
o
a.
•H
*
*
in
m

s
m





0
a

CD
in

01
>
u

4}
*

-0
-

rn
m
*
CO

0
m
«,
U
 o in o
o mo T\
in rg — <
III!
O CJ O O
fM ^ O

«
o
1
o
ml
1 i »
O oj
o o o oioio;o:
o o.o o
o o o ;n
m Q'inifM
fM -4
I




0 0
aim
— i





in a:
rvia
z


^

















a
»*«l
o
Oi
CC

u
•-*
X
a.
^
ct
o
a
01
o
m
M
*"*
m
**
o>
r*
""*
o
fM
g,
sr
o
sr







m
*
**
o
•0
m
o
fM
ON
CM
W
u>
O
m
^
"
in
•0
CM
*
^

0
00
fM
r»)O
™*
cr
fM
^.

m
fM
r-
~*
m
>r

i-^1 ^' IT)




_j
at
H-
»- z








CO 0)
- H- XH O x^ O * CX ^3 i QC O Z 0 z o 00 UJ t- aj X « fM 1-4 m -0 m fM ""* 0> CM m m 0 1 " o fM r" oo ^4 * fM CM ^ CM CM •O m •o 0 " -y ^ -4 (M in fM u> r- — ( h- Z OJ _a 2T «* m^J 01 ^a. t~ =301 Z "^CJ 0 ^ H- Z or ™£ z (X 01 > O o o. tj i ct UJ u. CD O . X * 00 rM '* 00 m m ^ CM ^ ^ •o fM CM " m fM fM CM P^ •r m DC UJ o
-------






 a.
_J HH
£ U
2 -
;:
0 3
^ *•
(£ **
<£ 1-
Z -i
0 <
• O *-»
(M U
^0 G£ fc«t
O z
uj u. S:
_| -s
CO UJ £
< CC
i-
o
--i
a:
1- "-
to o

^ »
_J O
< 2
Z.
| .i
UJ
a.

^
Z3
O
u













1
4>;
a
ac
UJ
a

f_
u
^

i/7
OJ
O
C3
>.
1—
t j
<
uj
a.

V7
<
X





























-^
u
t—
oc
01
a
>
_j
*.
Q.

UJ
^>
•r
rg












o
o
o

o
o
in

y.
UJ
>
O


o

o




•T

fM


«T
«*• r~


w
•M




n4
fM

xn







^>
fM












V*
w>




m
^M

rM
i-t






"l
m










0 0
0 0
o o

m

fM


-r
ao


CT1
x^




fM
^

r-







33
u-v











o

o


o



o





o


o







0











O 0

o

o






o





o


o







a











o

0

o


o



o





o


0







o











o
o o o^'cn
o o o o

o

o


o



o





o


0







0











o
o
0

o

o


o



o





o


(J







o













«v « «. W H «. *
o, o: o; o ini o in o
o mj o; m
\f\\ fM *^'
11 II
rM

1
!-l| O

1
o o a1 o o o
Oi O1 O' O
O O O 0
O 0

1
*.Hf>jw
m'o in
fM -<
i

CMj<-4

1





rwio



2:
2





























































































Z
G

a.
ac

tj
«-«
X
a.
r

rg


tn



-O
•*>




f\
*\

1-4
v^






tr>
>r













Q£|
f~l
2:
UJ
VJ

X
t—
ac
u
Z





X

O

O



*f\


r»
•^




"1
>y

m
•^






o
n






































































31 l/)l
a -u
l/)| 2
1













































to

t-
«i
t-
un

u
ac
H
UJ
Z

^

^


o



in
•^




•o
fM

CO
tM






f»
O
*H


















a
ac

uj
3;


fM

_


in



•4'
•^




CO
•H

r*-







fM
in















0
oC
H-
UJ
Z

Z
(J
Z





























































































Z
a
Z
ac
;ti
>
O
o

u.
\J

yr
QC
VJ
U.
1
rg

^



ao


>?•
•4"




fM
«-4

o
•w







oc
e>

o
~<
^


^
vO


cr>
CM




— 
-------
      to
      cc
      <
      UJ
      >-
     I*"
      CO


      s
  •    tu
NO
UJ    <
_l    I—
CD    Z
<    I


      I
      >
      tU
i- uj; j,
a t-:v7|   ,
        iorl
UJ
:u a
      ">
o;   jcejo

 •!   |2i*1
O!   ioi
      a:
              r-!
              o
                                  v>
                                     —•Icpicp;
                                     cr
                                    1^
                                  'vj in
                                        O;0
                               O O
oo
•Mi Ojt
                                     cr
                                        o
>(%.[
 m
                                           o  o
                            o o o o o o1
                            O'O O!Q.O '-J-
                            o o o!o o oj
                       gjg.
                       oil
                          O
                         in
                            o
                            o
                            o.

                            o'
                            o
                                            o, in

                                             I  < I
                                            o o
                                            0,0
                                            o o

                                            o
                                            vni
           !\Jj.

            t
           o
           o
           !o
    I   I '
   O'CJ
   00

    •I *,'
                            oo TO;


                            oo
                                                                         u< cr
                                                                      f"- in .'M
                                                                      
•»' oiml

                            -1-
                            h-j
                            UIO Oi;JJ
                                             rsifu^toj]
                                             g^x rv^l ^T*
                                                                       CO
                                                                       •o
                                                                       O
                                                                          tr
                                                                          m
                                                                             ra
             at i

             Z
             •JJ
                                                                    UJ (J, v  M<
                                                     V^-ir-lo1
                                                     Vco as^oi
                                                                                                •sol
                                                                                           vO
                                                                                     OJ
                                                                 m oj
                                                                                                IOW
                                                                                     OJ I
                                                                                   Z
                                                                                   UJ
                                              UJ <

                                              o
                                                                                                     a:
                                                                                                     UJ
                                                                                                     O
                                                                                                              JJ

                                                                                                              X
                                              X
                                              CC. '
                                              a
                                              u.
•i
a.
O
                                   JUJ 2
                                 vOfaj;O
   13
   O
   U
                                                                                                           CJIUJ
                                                                                                           I- «
                                           153

-------
CO
to
1 -

Q
01
J>
•H
o le 

o x
Ul
-1
^
z
s! o
2
O »
c£ O
:» *^
Z
Ul
<£
0
i
O
UJ
s
^
1-
— .
z
^_
z
1- <
2
•"•
j
<
Of
_J

a
UJ
»—
**






















2 i
8 I

S
-*




CO
**
«—•
3
co
O
2
M4
a:
Q
0.
-U
cC


















*
9*


J
Z
«t

s»


•
o
z



^ ,
^
w































































—4







co
UJ
>"<
H«
Z
3
O
U

_J

""
*
^
H*
O
H*





































































CL
a
ae
u

z
a
t-
^
^
a.
UJ
a.

CO

r»
~*


(M
in

09






in
01











o
o
o
•
0
o
in

ex.
cu
>
u


at
0)

(i)

^


-o
"<

ao






-4
in










SJ

f*
IA


1^


^






•-1
0









00
o o

o

a



O


CJ






O










O
0
o o a o
•i •. «v »
O O O O
o »n o m
tn rg' i-«
lilt

o

o



o


CJ






o










o
c?

0

u



o


o






o










o
o

u

0



0


o






o










o
0

o

o



o


u






o











a o ol
»f W M
U^ C3
r\l

1
t> 0,0 a ca
0,0 o olo
Mf

1
CJ
0
J~\ O
0

'!"*•
O'
O O O O O O! f\> X
oio o m o
ml o: in
MI •**
1 1
tv


»-4


in



fC



LU
LJ
z
3































































a
o
UJ
cc

u
M*






•x.
a.
^c
IX

«M

f)

rn














H»
to
n
•r










j
^
a
H-

rg
=0

r-4
>J"


CO
•^

Q*







UCJ

UD
r>4


m
«-•

^»






o CM
in














Z
Uji
u!
£ X
m


















t—it- V-JH-
ac tr! r> to
Solo
OJZZ
ol 1
O cu
to

j;









































































to
^
^~

U-
X

03

f«l
O*


-0
•-«

eo
v*4





••4
2

















C3
C£
h-
UJ
X


s

f"~
•4-


o
— i

in






0*4
m














O
QC
ai
£
Z
u
z





































































»-
z
'XI
a;
2
K
'U
>
o
U
u.
tj
3,-
(X
u
u.

V

o*
^


•o


ro






rg
m







CO

r\j
tn


fM
-l
jE

LV
Z

-------













•K
in
c
O
~
u
Lv
-0 •
4J O
— 04-

CM














O^-^
O sO
ft) *OO
N LA -
_ CM —
•" §5.
CM
















•tc
ft)
U
*^
u
4)
CO
y-
O

4)
•D
O
o_








*
•K
4)
U
*>
ft)
tn
O
t_
•o
>
o
u
CL
















Ov.













I- C ** -T — PA O
O O «n — — — —
O Ol —
o ec re 3 —

*p fN. LA r- -a-
4V •— tM
1 — 1 O

tn o o *j —


i d»? cn .3- o t-»
c r- co r-. so
(D ft) *•»
U > C Z tA f*- OO CO
O O 4) CF\ PA PA CM
-I 0 £


S z , * ~
o CM -a- LA -3-
H- —

i- c *« JT r- oo oo
O O tn CM —
ta *cn —
o a> — c z r-. «M — —
U OC ID 3


M r-. i IA iA
4V CM CM
1 — 1 U
0 IQ in —
O.— •— k. Z JSJ 1 PA PA
tn u o *v
_ c ** S £ £ £

O O ft) Z O O OO OO
-•0 £ CM -
TU ** 00 PA PA PA


o z on CM CM CM


0 § tf> ~ = ** - 2

So?^lz 2 m '* m


a* co *o -a- PA
4J ^ CM
1 — 1 U
4) 10 M *—
Q.— — u z f-. CM vt> r^
«n o o 4J
c oo oo P. so
o > c z IA r- o o
-I CJ g

** IA CM CM CM
"^
K Z CM CM CM O
O ff\ PA -f *"1


I
o +-* <
4J C C — C ft)
-^ E E "o I c C
UJ — ft) ft>O.O)OO
O O 4V 4-» 4J O —
— Q. (0 4) 0) *- 03 4-i

LA CO OO





r-. o CM
OO CM


co  - ID
t_ Q)
CO —
o —
— re  "~ ft) 3"
o * f e
ft> — C O.

C ID ™
o "*o
* O tft *~
ft) in ** *x.
U « C PA
"E« ii
ft) C C -Q
4J O> •-

O C "to PA
cr: c cn
-O >- E *"
L. 4-1 C -
O ft) O

c — o *-•
i_ O tt)"o
ft) •— 4J O
"^ 4) "oi4J
• w 3 C
U. C O ft)
Q. » H- 01
at . re
in t_> wt c

O ft)
§. Z £"
C ft) —
*- O U 0
en "> —
-O C *- (D
-
t>


tn
O
4-«
5
•o
C
§.
in
ft)
u.

k.
4)

3




*






























•
8
V
cn

X ^
> 2
3 L.
tfl
ft)
ft) k.
-C Q
4V
£ V

cn
c o>
— c
C 4J
O u
D. 0
wt a.
£4)
k.


4V 4V
O O
1 1
g g
•o -D
ft) ft)
tfi m
10 ID
JD va
tn w
ft) ft)
ID ID
c c
ft) ft)
u u
t> v
Q. (X.
•^ 1




              5  5
155

-------
      C3
      <
      O
      QC
vO    —
SO    >
CO
<
o

z
o

<

<




T3
0)

ID
3
i—
ID
LU
























V4-
0
J_
4)
E
3
Z















in
in
0)
c
ID
•—
4-1
U

14-
LU

|
C

>»
>


,
C











1_
>




in
u
4)
in























X.
0)

c
4)
>
"•
4-J
U
V
14-
LU

4-1
U
V
t-
v»-
LU
ID
1_
4J
3
(U
z
0)
>
4-1
u
4)
U-
<*-
LU
0)
u
(U
LU
01
c
*4J
L.
a
4)
0£





























^
LA



^ ^
•a-

«—x
PA
>w^




_^
CM

^
^



^
<


















O
r^


u
NO


|

NO



CM




00


co
CM





PA



O

^—
^v
<

*v
"ID
4->
o
h-
o\o
O CO
^"

II II
O 0


1 1

O vO
0 CO



o o




o o


o —






r«-v CM


CM -*




LA r^





Q. O
3 O
0 0
u o o
o o
C -LA
O O 1
— 00
4J LA O
ID O
3 0) O
a > LC\
O O CM
a.
_
p^


II
o
fmm

|

oo



0




CM


CM






^


PA




^_
CM




O
O
O
0
LA
CM
1
O
O
O
O
O


O
r-.


II
r~
^•B

1

»•»
OO



o




PA


CM











1^.
CM




O
O
O
0
O
^—
1
0
o
o
o
IA


«• *«•





PACM cncr>vo cr>
CM PA — CM — CSI

vo •— cr\oo CM o
t— ~-



O O OO 1*** CM PA
-a- vo pA-a* CM LA



c
o o o
00 —
O O O1 —
O LA BC I-
LA CM 4J
U 4-1 C
II — in 4)
O O -C ID O
O O Q. 4)
O O (0 .C -C -C
LA o en u u 3 in
CM »~ O Q O O IU
0) Z Z t/) ^j*
d
•a- vo -a-
r^ \o r>*


II II II
co NO -a-


i i i

CM CM OO
oo r^ ^^



0 CM O




-a- PA —


LA CO LA
pM.





ONO r^


— -a- -a-
•~ <~



o PA r--.
LAOO CM





01
Q.
1- 4-1
c
>. . »- V- Q.
Oi i — V fl\
+J J V
L- C J3 T3
4J 0) 3 C
0) CJ tO —
z
                                                                                                O CM O
                                                                                                CM  Lf\ —
                                                                                               vD  LA CM
                                                                                               CM SO
                                                                                               en 
-------
OJ

^  M- C
UJ UJ —
J-
r».
n
in

t

tr>
r*.
|»» O WN *»\
oo r^oo m
H n H n
o o in so
^•B
till

i»*o o on
CO CO CT» IA
OO CT\sO O
oo so r^so
R N H H
O O sO rr\
•••
1 1 1 1

oo on CM <»•>
oo so oo r-.
o^ m
fv.\o
n H
in in

i i

S3
OAOO ro
so r»-r-»
H H fl
sO t*\ t>.

1 1 1

in— o
1^.0000
                                0)
                             I  >

                             —  4-1
                                O
                             >. «
                             I. M-
                             0) »*-
                             > UJ
                                            o o o o
                                                              o o o o
                                                                                 o o
                                                                                             o o o
      UJ
      o
t-.
NO
OQ
<
      o
      of
o
z
o
                                4J

                                4)
                                111
                                    o
      o
      o
                             i.  C
                             o>  a.
                                                  CM CM in —
                                                                    CM  CM-a- CM
                                                                                       00 CM
                                                                                                   CM
                                                                                                          CM
                         
                            O o£
                                   CM
                                  vO
IA O O
— — cst

                                                                                             \£>
                                  in
                                  UJ

                                  P
                                         o
                                         o
                                                                        
                                         4-> ITi O O O     Q. 0»
                                         
                                         3 V O O O     O) 1-
                                         Q. > LA O LA     O O
                                         O O CM —        O Z
                                         a.                o
                                                                                                 C  4J  4J
                                                                                                 C  C
                                                                                    *i.    9
                                               V

                                               o
                                              o
                                                                                                «*-  3
                                                                        .   .   4J    O
                                                                        U 3 U)    »-
                                                                                    V
                                                                                       •M  C
                                                                                       «0
 c

•o  c

-------
      UJ
      CC
      o
      a
      (£.
      <
      o
      CO


      CC
      o
      <

      _J
      <
oo    ui
vo    z:
UJ    O
—i    ae
oa    —
      UJ
      M
      u.
      o
      <


      <

      Ul
in
4)
C
T3 4)
•M •—
10 4J
3 U X
*•" 4) Ci)
 M- c
UJ UJ —
0)
1 >
c —
u
>• 4)
1- M-
4) M-
> UJ
4)
>
4->
1 U
C 4)
— »4-
U-
UJ
(Q
!_
4-1
3
4)
4)
>
4-1
U
4>
U-
M-
UJ
4>
u U
a) 4)
> u-
>4-
Ul
M- cn
O c
1- 4->
4) v> i-
J3 U O
EDO.
3 V) 4)
Z =3 a£




























,_^
in
^•^




	 	
-'

—v
t*\
*—*



^^
CM

^
^~


_^
<

















tr> ocor^.-3~or^ cMcMoo-a*
-3- oovoinco-3-in  r*^ •— oo o
in «M> ^~ — •• CM *>H> •—•




r— comi^r^ocp> cor^oAcM
^-* ^™ CO ^1" CO CO *— CM

in •— OCOCMCOVO ^fr^co— -
r—f


\ — inoovoaooocM — — co CM
o •— comoo r-^voco-3"
CM


I/I C
4) a. ooooo o
— 3 OOOOO —
4J O ooooo cn —
o cgooooom a£ v.
o o m o in CM -M
~ c->incM— o*JC
~ O O i i i i i — in 4)
<. — O O O O O O -C (TJ 0
4->mooooo a. 4)
A (Q ooooo nyjcjzjz
(0 3 0) O O O LTV O CH1-I-3U)
+j o.>inoincM— OOOO4)
O OOCM—  •—



O _ v£) _ „ lf\
m CM co vo co •—
•^ •—


4-1
C
4) l-
4) E 
^». i -^ m
^^ ^ •*" IVI
1— 4-> 4) U C
C > C ID
>. 4) O 3 SI
•M C T3 U O 1
— — ra c. o —
O (0 J3 4) 14- 1 —
*>. i- t- a. o >- u t-
01 i ^ dt rt ^ fl\
T-* ^ V W WB V
1-CJQT3 E>>3-C
•M 0) 3 C l_(DO4->
4) O (/) — O 21 O O
Z U.
                                                      158

-------
1/1
I/I
0>
c
"O 0)
4) >

m 4-1
3 U
— 4)
(0 M—
> 14.
UJ UJ







3
•o
c

^
CM

II

O
CM
1

p*^
.JJ-
1 O


II

1 0

1

1 O
r»-
oo onoo


II II II

NO •* —
CM CM PA
1 1 1

•3- m on
-3" -4" ("A
LA
PA

II

LA
r—
,

o

J.
CM

II

^—
CM
,

LA
.3-
on —
CM PA

II II

CM r»-
CM —
1 1

— oo
LA-3-
CM
CM

II

*mm
CM
,

pr^
-3-
OO


II

LA
CM
1

m
•3-
LA PA
CM PA

II II

•~~ r**»
CM —
1 1

NO O
-4- tA
NO -r o
PA CM LA

II II II

LA cr» r-»
«— ~— •—
i i i

i— PA 1^
LA^T NO
o
cc
                   r-v    \O
                   LTV    CM
                                    o o —  u-v . JT
              i   o
              c  a)
                    —«    en
                                    o o \o
                                                   . •
cc
o

>
o
LU
ID
L.
4-1
3
<1>


— > o orAooi — LAP^ cMoncMr^ — -3" LA
PACM •— CM NO PACMCMPA CMvOPA
*-^ v~

2^


V
>

4-1
U
(1)
^4—
14-
LU




•*s PA o r** o ^™ on NO oo r** r**» "^ NO on oo
CM LA — CM CM OO CA-3-CM-4- CMI-x-3-


                                                                                                     CM
                                                                                                     on —
U

LL.
O

Z
O
              >- V
              u  O
              0)  0)
                          oo
                                    O O  CM — -it —
                                                                                  M^ o in
                                                                                                  LA CM
LU
I-

o
       Ol
    I/)  C

 I-  0)  4J
 0)  
                                 O O
O O  O O O
o o  o o o
o o  o o o

O O  O O LA
O LA O LA CM
LA CM  —
 I   I   I   I   I
O O  O O O
o o  o o o
o o  o o o

o o  o in o
LA o  LA CM —
CM —
                                                  o

                                                  CT1   —
                                                   4-> 4J
                                                  O) L. U 3 tf>
                                                  O  O O O  5
                                                 C3
|S^
vO



•
4J
•~ *—
0 (Q

O 4-1
L. C
4-1 0)
fl) O
PA
on









c
0)
-Q
L.
3
o
3
to
NO
O






4-1
C
(U
t>
c
0)
Q.
0)
-a
c
—



4->
C

E
C
U
at
>
o


14-
o

E
u
O
CM
O




i—
•—
U
c
3
0

1
U
O
>-
(U
z:
NO

CM

1_
(U
01
03
C
a>
3E
1
*«•
••«
U
c
3
O
U
OO
^-*












L.
0)

4-1
o
                                                              159

-------




T3
<1)
4J
(0
3
V—
m

LU





in
in
a)
c

^
•— »
4_l
U
0)
14-
lt-
LU

1
c

>.








X

•—
4J
U
(U

LA
-3-

II

0^
^~

1

ao
LA



„ 	 s
LA o

LA
CM

II

rr\
«•_•

1

OO



LAOO r>-
•^-

II

r—
f—

1

SO
m

II

LA
CM

|

CO
rr\ LA SO




O




0




O
sO

II

O


1

[^
SO




o

f« CM o r~»
r~^so — csi

n H II II

O O O OO
-3- —

1 1 1 1

fl CM O LA
r^so LA-=T




0 O O 0

so vr
n-\sO

II II

so r-
r—

1 1

CM —
LA r~.




0 O

r^co CA
so '— r^

II II II

O tr\ 
4-1
O
a>

CM —
                                              tv\ CM -3"
                                                                                     O  fi
                                                                                                      CO —
                                           o"\
                                                                ao -a-
                                                                                       • oo
o

u_
o

z
o
                   1-  U
                    M-
                            O CM  rr\
                                                 O -3-  — CM
 o
 o
        CD
    in  c

 u  a)  4J
 (U  l/l  L.
-0  =>


 3  14-   LA O LA

                         O O CM •—
                        Q.
                                                             o
                                                             -C
                                                             Q.
                                                             (o
o
0)
                                                     
                                                                                         o
                        4-1  C

                        tt)  O
                                                                                                   CM CM —
                                                                                                   — CM —
                                       o
                                      4->
                                       ID  U
                                   4-1  1-  O
                                   C -W  4-1
                                   U  in  n>

                                   C  C  4->
                                   i- •—  in
                                   (U  E  —
                                   > -a  c
                                   o <  —
                                   C9     E
                                      +->  TJ  C
                                   4-  3  <  2
                                   00      O
                                                     E  -w -tJ
                                                     !_ — .—
                                                     O 3 3
                                                                  160

-------
      •z.
      o
      CC.


-D
(0
4->
ID

p—
ID

LU



in
in
0)
c
(U
>

4->
U
(U
<4-

LU

C







X
(U
T3
C

(U
.-
4— '
u
o cnvo
-3- LA

II II

-3- r~~
— CM

i i

.3- vO
LA ro


— v —• 0

II

0


1

sO
LA LA
LA ff\

II II

cnoo
*—

1 1

-3" f"\
LA SO LA


O


— o
O CO CO

II

o
CM

1

O
VO


O

II II

v£>

II

LA n-vOO
CM

1 1

cr\ i— •
sO -3-


— O


1

^~
LA


0
r^Co

II II

LA —
•— i—

1 1

\O CM
-3- r--


— o
CM 1 	 3"
•^f CO -^"

II II II

— r«-v cn
r— •— •—

1 1 1

rr\ o CO
LA LAvO


— O O
                     0) LA
      =>


      O
                                        \ O —
                                                         CM O -T —
                                                                          LA CM
      a
      UJ
      a
      Q-
      x
      LU
~-    oe
r--    <
      o
LU    CO

CO    >-
                                          -3- vO LA
                                                         CM VO VO  LA
                                                                          vO
                              -3-
                              CM
                                             en r>-
                                                                  LA
                                                                                          cr»oo
M
f^
^
O

LL.
O

Z
0
^
<
^
_J
<
>
UJ

>-
1-
z
^
o
o



















>>
i_
0)
>






I/I
1_
V. 4)
0) in
.a =)
E
•3 <4-
z o






















0)
4-1
O
0)
14-
14-
LU


— *. CO
t—
*— ^





a>
c
.—
4->
1_
o
a
 cn
< LA
*-^







 LA
O CM



LA










CM
CM











O
O
O
M
O
LA
CM
1
O
O
o
•.
o
o



CM










r-.
»—











o
o
0
A
o
o
^~
1
o
o
o
A
o
LA



o










o
f—










c
o

D)

a:

0 4->
— • in
.c ro
a. 
cn i-
8z
CJ3


LA — CM










cn r^ CA
•— •— »—













>»•
(0
u.
4-J
C
(1)
O

.C JZ
4-* 4-* 4-*
u 3 in
O O H)
z co 3



LA r*->










— CO
-3" •—









4->
c

£
c
i.
V) (U
3 >
4J O O
ID L. U
4-> 4->
 <1) >4-
o z: o
o >-
u 4-> c E
4J 0) O L.
vs^ -z. o
Z U-


rA ro CM










cn-3- vo
— CM —





1_
o
4-J
(0 L.
L- 0
4-> 4-J
I/) (0
>— u
C 4-1
•— in
C i-J-T
T3 C

g
4J "O C
3 < 3
O O
-C £ C
+-> 4-1 J*
3 3 =3

                                                              161

-------
                 4>
                 C
             -o  
             4J .—

              CO  •M
              3  O  X
             —  0)  >4-  C
                             VO
                              on
                              LA
00 CM O LA CTVVO
ff\ ^O m^" .^* ^J" -3"
II II II II II II
LA O O m-4- CM
CM CM — — i—

•a- -3- -3-
II II II
CM -3- CM
                       on CM  O OO POOO
                       SO vO vO LAvO LTV
                                          CM   LA —
                                          vo  LA LAVO
                      O oo •—
                      vO LAvO
                                                                                     r-» !*•• on
                                                                                     -4- -a- -T

                                                                                      II   II  II
                                                                                      i   i
                                o o  o
                                VO VO  LA
       10

       z
    

—  4->
    O
 >> (I)
                       Uft
                             -a-
                             CM
                                       O  O -^- —
                                                                        CM •—
                                                                                     CM
                                                                                           OO
                                                                                                     OO  if\ —
       C9
 I   O
 C  0)
                    ui
—»     CM
•3"    vO
                                       CM  O vO CM VO VO
                                                 •— —  CM
                                                                                        — vO
                                                                                                      CM Ot —
       o

       o
       LU
       0£

       o
-X     O

      OO
                       — LTV O OO OO OO
                              t— CM rr» crv
                                                 O •—
                                                 ur\ -a-
                       O oo CM
                      -4- oo in
                                o oo CM
                                -41 CM —
CM     <
CO     Z
       o
       CJ
                    LU
                       CM     —
                              on
                                                                 ^- PO LTV LTV
                                                                 vO OtvO CTv
                                                                                     o m CM
                                                                                     r^ PO —
                                                                                        CM
       o

       o
 I-  O
 0)  o)
       01
—    vo
                O CM CM at o>"> ro
                              .	3-
   OO O  LflvO
   — CM  — •—
                CM
                — rr> CM
                                                                                     cr\oo CM
                                       OO PO O I— O-3-
                                           — LT\ O^vO CM
                                                 CM  OO LTV CM
                                                         " OO
                                                              CM  LA LA
                                                              -^  — O^
                                                              —  n"\ ^~
                                       O^ LAOO
                                       -a- P^ CM
                              l/l
                              
                     O O
                    0.
                    o o o o o
                    o o o o o
                    o o o o o

                    O O O O LA
                    O LA O LA CM
                    LA CM •—
                     I   I   I   I   I
                    O O O O O
                    o o o o o
                    o o o o o

                    O O O LA O
                    LA O LA CM —
                    CM •—
 C
 o

 Ol
 Q)
<£

 U  4->
—  U)
    TO
    0)
                                                               -C
                                                               a.
                                                                      c
                                                                      
 O) l-
 o  o
 0) z
i_  3  in
O  O  4)
Z v> 3
                                                                                   D
                                                                                   0.
                                                                                  O  ID
                                                                                   (1)  0







C
ro
-Q
i_
^
-0
3
I/)




4-1
C

o


4—
o

E
i_
0



•—
U
c
3
O
<_>
1
1_
o
>-
5

L.
0)
Dl
C
(0

1
»^
•—
o

3
O
o










L.
CD
f~
4-1
O
                                                                 162

-------



•o
4J
CO
13
-—
>
LU







in
d)
C
(U
._
4-1
U
(1)
ll~
<4-
LU

1
C

>s
U
(0






X
(U
c


.—
4J
U


III II
o\ o -3* c*\ r*^
r-- LA vo LA r~-



O CM — OA —





1
vO
vO



CM



-3-

II
LA
p—

1
P^
LA



,„



VO

II
f^.


1
LA
I"S>



, —



UJ
C9
                       (TV
                                —  o oo o
                                                       O -3- —
C3
UJ
<£.
                      oo
                      CM
                                    LT\ •— OO
                                                          O OO
                                                                       CM
                                                                                    OO LTV LT\
21
Z
CC
LlJ
y
0
C9
flC
LU
1-
z
(U
>

o
a)
4-
<4-
LU



-s LA
CM LA
— *




                                •— CM
                                                          CM
                                                                       r-^oo
                                                                                    OO
                                                                                    — CM —
O
          u  o
          (U  (U
                                    — oo LA
                                                       LA-3- LA
                                                                       CM vO
                                                                                    moo
LU


>-
O
o
Q)
-M
C
0
o
r_
^

n
rM
ft)
4-J
o
i-
— OO CM C^»
CM i 	 :T rA
CL o o o
3 O O O
o o o o
I. O •>•>•>
a o o o o
O O LA O
C •- LA CM —
O O 1 1 1
— o o o o
4J LA o o o
re o o o
r— U - - -
3 (U O O O
Q- > LA 0 LA
O O CM —
13-
vO OO CM OO
CM CM PA CM
0
a> —
a) ro
OL L,
O 4-> C
•— U) (U
j: ro o
Q. 0)
(D -C JC JI
1- 4-> 4-1 4J 4J
O) i- 1- 3 in
O O O O   U  O
C  4-1  4-1
 "O  C
o < —
o     E
    4-> T3  C
H-  3 <  3
O  O     O
   -C .C  C
E  4J  4J  .*

O 3 3  5
                                                           163

-------



•Q


•«
4^
U X
0) 4)
»l T^
M— C
UJ —

f"^
co
II

PO


i

o
cr\

CM SO
r>.co
u u

-a- o
•—

i i

SO SO
00 co

— oo -a-
00 00 00
i II II

-a- po-a-


i i i

in — oo


oo
oo
u

CO


1

v»
OA

cr»
00
n

CO


i

CM


r^ PO
oo oo
II II

po-a-


i i

o F^
on oo

r-
00
II

CO


i

o
O~V

-a-oo
coco
u II

CO PO


1 1

r**> •••
OO CA

r-
CO
II

PO


i

o


o o-\oo
OO CO 00
II II II

in PO o


i i i

in CM oo
OO OTtOO
             0)
          I   >
          c —
          >•  0)
               in
                              o o o •— •— —
                                                      — O CM O
                                                                                       — CM O
O
EC.
I   U
C  D
                     -3-
                     CM
                              — O CM CM 00 —
                                                      -a- oo in
                                                                           -a- vo
                                                                                          in o
o
o
o

<
                     vO
                     in
                     o CM NO oo  in in
                                 — CM
                                                      inr-. in
                                                                        •— CM —
                                                                                             in
UJ
_l
oo
<
H









LL.
O

Z
O

H
<
^J
>
LLJ
>-
—



• ~
4-1
U
0)
M-
<+-
UJ




^~* ^— -3" O^V ^— *•" -3" CM OO 0^ CO ^~
CM OO COOO— -3- OCO— CM
-* Jf — CM ____


0)
>
I. U
A)  M-


^*» O"l CM PO SO OO OO CM SO CO f^ PO
— in — CM so -a- in i — a-oo
— CM —
                                                                        in«— in
                                                                                       oo
                                                                                          in CM
                                                                        CM o r>«
                                                                        -a- in\o
                                                                              r»-
                                                                              in
                                                                                              en
          O  i-
         -Q  O
          e  o
          •3  tt)
            CO

            CM

           OO
in o vo •—
in CM o CM
   — CM -a-
OO LA-T vO
f~> COOO CM
— CM — CM
r-. o vo
in r<-\ m
•—a- CM
CM — o
oo o -a-
— vo
0)
4-1
O
<
•t
(0
o
Q. O O O O O
3 O O O O O
O 00000
 in o m CM —
O O CM •—
0.
o> —
(U (Q
Q£ L.
U 4-1 C
— in to
-C ro o
Q. 0)
nj -c _c jz
in. -4—1 JJJ 4-J ^J
D) L. i_ 3 m
0 O O O 4)
Q) Z Z V) 3
u
. 0»
4J C T3
— —me
O ro -Q 0)
^. U I_ CX
01 i ^ yiv
<4_t j \y
I- C -Q T3
•U 0) 3 C
 C (0
d O 1
u —
O 1- U U
o c^ fl)
u »— w
E >- 3 -C
>- (D O 4->
O X 0 0
U-
                                                        164

-------
in
in
4)
C
•0 4)
0) >
4-1 •—
3 U
— 4)
(D M-

LU LU







X
4)
-O
C


^_
oo

II

LA

1

SO
oo

o


II

0

1

o
oo

O CA rA
o\ oo oo

II II II

O -T SO

1 1 1

o r^ CT\
ctoo oo

CA
r>-

II

•f

i

r-^

i->.-a-
(TvsO

I) U

o -a-

| |

I^CO

CT\
oo

II

o

1


r* cr» r».oo

^^

ps,.

CA

— LA
r^« oo r^» oo oo

U

so

|


u

CA

1

p«"v O
GO
OA

II

cr»

i

CM
oo

II II

-4- CA

1 1

LAOO
OO OO
                U
                4)
                  UJ
                                    o  o o  o
                                                       o o o o
                                                                         o o
                                                                                     O O O
      o
      CC.
                  LU
                                    CM  O  CM  CM
                                                       — O LA O
                                                                         LA-
      o
      o

      UJ
      (/)
      3

      O

LA    <
CM CM SO CM
                  ur» — no
                                    O CM
      <
                           vO
                                    CM  CM  O  (T»
                                    —  —  CM  •—
                                                      -a- oo
                                    O CA
                                    LA —
so 
^H
ID

h—
0
CM
Q.
O
U 0
C9 O
O
c «
o o
— o
4-1 LA
ID
— V.
3 4)
Q. >
0 0
0.
O LA
CM -a-
O 0
o o
o o
*, M
O 0
O LA
LA CM
1 1
O 0
O O
O O
•t **
O 0
LA O
CM —

O
o
o
*
0
o
^~
1
o
o
o
»
o
LA

sO
CM
^O
Ol
4)
t£.

U

Q.
ID

CJJ
8
o



4-1
V)
ID
4)

4J
L.
^

O sO OO
CA CA CM
ID
U
4-1
C
0)
u
J^ f
4J 4-* 4J
t- 3 V)
O O tt)
3^ ^O ^B



in
3
4-1
ID
4-1

o
L.
«
£
CT> —
OO CA



O
L.
4-1
4)
O X
u
4J C
«o

nment
nistrator 33
u •—
4) E
> -o
O <

4J
U- 3
O O
JC
E 4-1
o !x
U.
LA co
u
o
4J
£
4J
U)
•M
c

'I
3 i

-C C
4J .*


                                                            165

-------
          I/)
          in
           14-  c
                                LA p<-» o vo LA on
                                   t-^ oo
                                                          -a- o-\ o vo
                                       i   i
                                oo o -a- — oo PA
                                oo oo oo oo r^ r—
 II  II  II   II

ff\ VO LA pi~>


 I  I  I   I

h- LA LA O1
                   VO  CM —



                    II  II  II

                   vo  -a- PA
                                                                             oo
LA LA —
vo !"•*• p***

 n  H  n

LA -a* vo


 i  i  i

o on p"v
              (U
          i   >
          >.
          i_ i
           »•
                LA
                                O O  — CM -
          C <1>
                      -3-
                      cq
                                — —  — (V> fr\ I
                                                             CM vO -
                      oo
                      CM
                                O CM VO CO O
                                                          VO OO —  CO
                                                          CM f\ ro  f\
                   OO LA LA
                   — vo -*
                                                                                             \o
o
o:
u_
O
                CM
                       cr\
                       Cf\
                                   vo
                                          — o •—
                                             O CT>
o  r-- ro on
oo  — • -U
          1- U
           LA
O 1
o o
LA O
O
 LA
O CM
O O
o o
0 0
o o
LA O
CM —
1 1
O O
o o
0 0
0 0
O LA
o o
o o
o o
O LA
LA CM
0 0
o o
o o
LA O
CM —
C
o
01
0)
a:
O 4J
•— m
-c m
a. u
m -c
01 L.
0 0
fl) Z
0

4-1
C
0)
<_>
J2 -C
i- 3 in
O O 
Z CO 3
a.
r-
O
O
1_


C
— CD
CO -O
U L.
C -0
O CO

ipendent
u/
TJ
C
C
0)
c —
(U (J
> c
O 3
C3 O
O
M- 1
O L.
E §-
i- ro
O Z
0)
Ol
CO
C
CD
U L-
C Q)
3 -C
O 4-1
O O
                                                         166

-------
CO
c
T3 CO

TO 4-1
3 O X

«o t- "o
> M- C
UJ LU —
CM
OO

II
f-\

1

LA
OO
LA CM f-.vO
01 r-^ r^oo

II II II II
O vO LA O

1 1 1 1

LA CO CM VO
CT» I-^CO OO
VO -3- CM OO
oo oo r~-oo

II II II II
{^ ^3 ^O ~^t"

III!

VO -3- OO CM
co oo r^- on
on on
1 — OO

II M
-3- o

i i

m on
oo oo
oo o o
oo oo oo

II II II
O -3" f>

1 1 1

CO -4" r<->
OO OO OO
           V <4-
           > LU
                  LA
                                   O •-" •— O
                                                       o o — —
                                                                            CM  O
                                                                                          o -- ~
in
a
cc
in

>-
           i   u
           c  -3-
O
O
           a)  v_
          .a  o
           E  a
-3-
0
in
CO
•—
4-1
C
3
O


f—
l_
<

*>
^M
ra
4->
O
1-
cnoo oo on
•— •— er\ CM



a. o o
3 O O O
o o o o
L. O - - O
CD O O O •
O O LA O
C « LA CM O
O O 1 1 —
— 0 O 0 1
4-> LA o o o
to o o o
— U . .0
3 0) O O -
Q. > LA O O
O O CM — LA
O_
CM LA
CM CM


C
o

01 —
CO CD
a: i-
4-J
U 4J C
— in co
-c ra o
a. co
ro .e .c
U 4J 4J
O) U i-
o o o
co z z
C3
CM LA
rr» CM













-C
4J 4J
3 U)
O CO
in 3

                                                                         
                                                                                       co


                                                                                   4-1  C
                                                                                   CO  O
                                                                                                 CM
              u
              O
              4->
              as  v-
           4-1 I.  O
           C 4J  4J
           CO in  m

           c c  4-1
           u —  in
           tt) E —
           > -a  c
           o < —
           O     E
              4J T> C
           <4- 3 < 2
           O O     O
              JC -C C
           E 4-1  4J J*
           u — — c
           O 3 3 3
                                                             167

-------
                     in
                     in
                     
                 4-1 •—
                  (0 4->
                  3 O  X
                 — 0)   M-  C
o

 I

CM
                        O  O cr\ [--
                        LA O CO LA
                         II  II   II   II

                        O  O O O

                         I  I   I   I

                        O  O rA Is-
                        LA O co in
                        o  r-. o o
                        O  vO LA O
                         II  II   II  II

                        o  o o  o

                         I   I   I  I

                        O  I— O  O
                        O v£ LA  O
                        o
                        oo
                         II  II   II

                        o o o

                         I   I    I

                        Ol-v —
                        CO vX> r-«
                  O CM
                  O vD
                   II   II

                  O O

                   I   I

                  O CM
                  O vO
                      C —
                     —  4-J
                         O
                      >-   LU
                 O O O O O O
                                             o o  o o
                                                                  o o o
                                                                                    o o o
                      c  o>
       c/1
       LU
                                              o o  o o  o o
                                                                          o o  o o
                                                                                               o o  o
                                                                                                                o  o o
                                                     r— O  •—
                                                                                 -— o
                                                                                               — CM  CM
                                                                                                                O  LA O
<     o
       <
                         o
                            CM
                                   CO
                                              o o  — i—=r CM
                                                                          — -3-  O
                                                                                               .	:r
       £
       o
                      >» 4J
                      1-  O
                      0)  
               O O
              0.
o o o o o
o o o o o
o o o o o

O O O O LA
O LA O LA CM
LA CM —•
 I   I   I   I   I
O O O O O
O O O O O
O O O O O

O O O LA O
LA O LA CM —
CM •—
                                           C
                                           O
                                                                       Ol
                                                                       0)
        C
    -.  Q)
-C  (0 O
 Q.   3  D
•  C -Q "O
I  (U  3  C
I  O  —
                                                                           o

                                                                           E

                                                                           O
                                                                                  0)
                                                                              —  01
                                                                              —  (0
                                                                              o  c
                                                                              C  (TJ
                                                                              3 s:
                                                                              o  i
u  O u
o  c a)
>. 3 JC
(D  O -M
ZOO
                                                                       168

-------
                 -o
                 o>
                     in
                     in
                     0)
                     c
                     o  x
                     0)  4)
                 > 14-  C
                                 -a-
                                 LA
—  O LA
f-x LA CM
                                            II   II  II
                                           O O  LA  I
                                                  CM
                                           — O O  I
                                           f-s LA LA
o o  o o
   LA-3- CO
                     II   II  II  II

                    o o o o
                          CXI
                    o o o o
                       LAVO CO
o o
LA O
                    II   II

                   CO O
                   co o
                    LA O
o o  o
O VO  O
              II  II  II

             o  o o
                    o
             o  o o
             C3 VQ
                        
                     c —
                                           O O — O
                                                               o o — o
                                                                                               o  o —
                          —.    O
                                           o o o o
                                                              o o o o
                                                                                  o o
                                                                                               o  o o
       QJ
       o
                                           CM •—
CA
LU
—I     Z
CD     O
      <
      LU

      £
                          CM
                                          -3- — CM  O
                                                              O  •—
                                                                                               CM  LA O
                    >. 4-1
                    v- U
                    (U U
— o  o o
                    000 —
                                       —  o
                                                    o — o
                 U  (U
                 a)  ui
                 E
                 3 14-
                zoo:
                                             . CM -a- O       —  CM LA LA
                                                                                               CM O  —
in
0)
4-1
c
3
O
0

r— •
^
^

A
v— •
m

o
i-
Q.
O

C3

C
O

4-1
as

3
a.
o
a.
o
o
o
o •>
o o
0 0
.LA
O 1
O O
LA O
O
\— •*
0) O
> LA
O CM

0
O
O
•>
O
IA
CM
1
O
O
o
•.
o
o
!~

o
o
o
*
o
o
^~
1
o
o
o
«t
o
LA


c
o
CD
0)
a:

o
•«
r*
a
 C
in a)
m o
a)
_C JC
4-J 4-1
L. 1-
o o
z z









(~
4-1 4-1
3 in
O 4)
co 3



in
3
4-1
(D
4-1
CO

o
!_
4-1
0)
z




o
u
4->
(U
o z:

4J C
0) O
y z

nment
!_
0)

o
C9

i*-
o

E
i_
O
U.
nistrator
trator
•— in
«~ tl „
13 C
< —
E
4J -O
3 <
O
.c -c

•_ •_
^ 3

                                                               169

-------




T3

»
4J
U
0)
4-
14_
LU

1
C

X
0)
>


,
c








X
V
•o
c


•—
4-J
U

14-
LU
01
>
4-J
U
 LA vQ \O

II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II

OO O O — LA O OO CT\ LA vO LA LACM-3" CO CO O
»— i— «— p—

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 III III

r^ ^^ o oo r*^ ^f CA o"i -^" oo CM ro co O""\ o CD r*^
NjD vO --f vO LA vO 1^* LA r^» vO vO vO vO vO VJO 1^^ vO



— s CM OO— O— O OCMOO • 	 O OCMO
LA




•"•^ ^~* ^.3 ^3 *~~ ••—* CO vO C^\ ^^ CO »cj" ^^ CO C>4 CO GO CD
^- ^—
LU

Q£


O

>-
                                                     OO O LT\
                                                                      O CM  r«-ivO
                                                                                                          —  CM
O
OO
CO
<
       =>


       >
       LU

       >-
                           CM
                     u u
                      LA LA CM
 in
 a)     a.

'<-•     O

O     C9

•—     C

<     •-
       4-1
  •*    nj
                                   (0
                                  4-1
                                   o
 O.
 O
OL
                                        O O O O O
                                        O O O O O
                                        o o o o o
                                     O   "  .  .   .   -
                                     O O O O O LA
                                     O O LTV O LA CM
                                      «LA CM —
                                     O  I  I   I   I   I
                                     O O O O O O
                                     LA O O O O O
                                        o o o o o
                                     J_   „».,...,
                                     0) O O O LA O
                                     > LA O LTV CM —
                                     O CM —
                                                                    O
                                                                    (U
                                                                   a:
                                  (0
                                  u
                                                                    U  4-1
                                                                          c
                                                                       in a)
                                                                       (0 U
                                                                        z z
(U
a

t-

>^
4^1
•^
O

o

4-1
(U
^





^~
(Q

4J
C
0)
o
r-.




c
(U
.0
u
3
J3
3
CO
m

4-1
C
(U
T3
C
a>
a.
(U
-o
c

nment
u
(!)
>
O
a

14-
o

E
u
O
O
-=r
•^
u
c

o
0
1
L.
O

(U
2:
o
CM

-------
                     0)
                     c
                 •O  

                  (D  4J
                  3  O  X
                 —  4- T>
                  >  4-  C
                 LU  LLJ —
CA


 II

CM
                           -4-
                           -cr
                                            LA o .— r-»
                                            -3-  LA -— VO
                                     O  O CM O
                                            CM
                                      I   I   I   I
LA O CA f--.
-a-  in CAVO
                     O cp ft CA
                     LA LA — fA

                     II   II   II  II

                     o r-. LA o
                        — CM
O I—DO r<->
LAvO ff\ CA
                                                                              cno
                                                                              CM LA

                                                                              II   II
                                                                              -3- O
                                                   CA O
                                                   -a- LA
                                   II   II  II
                                  r-~ o o
                                  —    -a-
                                                                                            I   I   I

                                                                                           O CA O
                         
                     c —
                     >•   UJ
                                            O O r- O
                                                                 o o — o
                                                                                                   o o —
       CO
       L14
                     I   U
                     c  v
                           —.    esj
                                            O O CM  O
                                                                 O — — O
                                                                                                   — o
       <_>

       >
       LU
•—     Q.
CO
       u.
LU     O
00
<
z
o
       >
       LU


       >-
       o
       u
              >• -w
              1- O
              4)  CM
                                                                                                   CM CO —
                                                                                                   •—a- CM
                                            CM  — O —
                                                                 — O ~ CV4
                                                                                                   CM CM O
                         cn
                     (ft  C.
                  a)  u>  L.
                 ja  =>  O
                  e      o
                  3  H-  0)
                 Z  O OC
                                  CM
                                            O^ "3" 0"*
                                                                 CM
                                                                       oo cn
                                                                                     CM
                                                                                                  vo -a- LA
in

0
1-
0.
o

O O
QL.
O O
0 0
0 0
O O
O LA
LA CM
0 0
0 O
0 0
•t «t
o o
LA O
CM ~

o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
•»
o
LA


c
O)

(U
o z:
u
4-1 C
0) O


Government
t Administrate
4— 3
o o
.c
E 4->

o :s
LU
dministrator
n
^ 3
o
-C C

•~ c
3 ^

                                                                     171

-------
I/I
(A
§

3 0 X
— tt> V
(0 >*- T3
> vi- C
£


LA
1
CM
O sD -* iA CO -a-
*•••

O OOO -3- OO LA
1 1 1 1 1 1
o r-.-a- so CM -a*
LA o so OA
LA-4* LA ro

«ll II U
V H tt
— r-» co   >
                  ii
                                      o o o —
                                                             — rr» O
                                                                                             ^- so O
                                      o o
                                                                                 cn-a-
                                                                                             CM
Csl
OO
      ee.

      I
      i
      5
CO
                                      O — CM SO O U\
                                                             OO OO so «M
                                                                                  — CTl
                                                               OO sO O
                                                                  Csl
      —»    CM
      04    sO
                                         — IA Csl O
                                                             *-
                                      o •—
                                                             ^ IAOO en
                                                                                  iA (T>
                                                                                             IA-3- CM
                                                                                                CM
 J/jil

 0) 73
 M L.

= g^


^5
                              IA
                                      CM co •—
                                               in co CM
                                               CM co r<»
                                IA O CM  CO
                                COCA CO IA
                                  oo co cr\
                                  oi OT\CM
                                         §
                                    «- Q
                                   C9 O
                                      o
                                    §-"
o o
o o
o o
                    o o
                    o o
                    o o
                                    4-1 LA O
                              ID
                              4-1
                              O
      10

      "3 w
      a >
      O O
      o.
               O O
               LAO
               CM —

               00
               o o
               o o
      LA CM

      I  I
         §O
         O
         o
                                                           o>   -•
                                         I.
                                            4J C
                                            in a)
                          O O
                          O LA
      LA O
      CM —
                                                              i-  u  3  in
                                                                            4)
                                                                            a
 >>       «
 *j     c -o
— .—  ID C

^  u  u o.
    84-130)
    C J3 T3
 4J  4)  3 C
 0) O CO —
— 0>
— ID
 U C


 O *
O •—

 L. (J l_
 o c 
-------

in
a>
c
•O 0)
(U >
a 4-1
3 U
— *
U
4)
CO






X
(U
"a
c
***
0)
>

+J
U
(D
M-
M-
-3"

II

-4-

1

CM
LA




— - O
LA
M*

0
r>.
CAsO

II

0

1

O
-3-




O




II

o

i

r*.
so




o



o
0
LA O O
LA
Lf\ K.O P^* Uf\ VO *•"

n

o

i

o

n

0

i

o
LA so




o







o




II II II


II

O O O-3-

1 1 1

LA O O
r^. LA so




O o o




i

C7"\
CM




O



CM LA
-3- r~»

n n

LAO

1 1

rv LA
•3* r*»




O 0



o
o

II

0

1

o
0
"



o



SO O
rA LA

II II

r»o

1 1

rA O
-4- LA




o o



                     I   U
                     C  (U
                       LU
                           -*    —        —  O O O
                                                               o o  o —
                                                                                   — o
                                                                                                0 —  0
       C£.
       o
                           -N    O
                                           LA CM — CM
PA    U.
co     o
-i     o
CO     —
                           CM
                                                  •— CM
                                                               CM O vO —
                                                                                                •— LA CA
       O
       O
                     1-  U
                     4)  O
                                           — P-  O —
                                                               — ^ O  —
                                                                                   CM —
                                                                                                CM — O
                                 rA
                                 CM
                                           O SO CM LA
                                                                  CM O
                                                                                                rA .3- sO
                                  C


                                  O
                                 U
 a.    o o o
 3     o o o
 o     o o o
 u  o  •>•>•>
U  O O O O
    O O LA O
 C   • LA CM —
 O  O  I   I   I
—  o o o o
 4-1  LA O O O
 ID     O O O
                                        a.
                                        o
                                        a.
                                            0)
       o o o
       LA O LA
       CM —
O)
0)
                                                            U 4-1
                                                           •— I/I

                                                            a. v
                                                            (D JC
                                                            U 4J
                                                               u
                                                                   i.  3  in
                    in
                    3
                    4-1
                    (D
                    4-1
                   CO


                    o
                                                                                      O
    u
    o

    ID
4-1  L.
C  4-1
u  in
c *^
c  c

o) 'i'

o <
ca
                                                                                   4-> C
                                                     £3S=)
                                                                  173

-------
                         in
                         
                      a)  >
                         O X
                         0) CO
                      > M- C
             II

             LA
                                      cn
                                      in
                                      - oo
                          fv so -4- LTV P-\

                           II   II  II   II  II
                                 O
                                 vO \O LA
    CM  O OO
   CM —  CM LA

    II   II  II   II

   — CM    CM
-4" -3- t»">
        II
       oo
\X>  rr» O
LA sO LA
                                       -a- oo t*\
                                       CM -3" or>

                                        II  II   II

                                       OO  IA —
                         I  >
                         c •—
                             u
                         >-  
                                       cu
                                      <
                                      o
                    Q.    O  O O O  O
                    3    O  O O O  O
                    o    o  o o o  o
                    U O   •  «  •   •  •
                    C3 O O  O O O  LA
                       O O  LA O LA CM
                    C   -LA CM —
                    O O  I  I   I   I  I
                    — o o  o o o  o
                    *J LA O  O O O  O
                    (0    O  O O O  O
                    —  V-   .  >  .   .  .
                    3  (U O  O O LA O
                    Q.  > LA O LA CM  —
                    O O CM  •—
                    Q.
C
O

Ol
(1)
CC
CL
m
!_
Ol
o  o
.        o>
 4J      C T3
—  —(DC
o    4)  3  C
 (U  O CO —
                                                                                                             c  —
                                                                                                             1_  .—
                                                                                                             cu  u
                                                                                                             >  c
                                                                                                             O  3
                                                                                                            CD  O
                                                                                                                o
                                                                                                             O  i-  O  L.
                     u
                     0)
                     CT1
                     (0
                     c
                     (0
                                     1_
                                     o
                     3 -C
                     O •»->
                     oo
                                                                        174

-------
    in
    in
    4>
    c
•o  

   M-  c
LU  LU —
                                       O
                                       CM
                                        I


                                       LA
                                                 LA o — <*•>
                                                 -4-     r<"\

                                                  II  II  U
                                                 CM rrt — —

                                                  I   I   I   I
tA — OOO
CM —    -3-
                                                                      II  II   II  II
   CM m —

 i   i   i   i
 II   II


CM —

 I   I
                                                                                                           O \O
II   II  II

O — cr>
   CM f">

I   I  I
        
    C —
   -w 4J
        U
    >-  IU
    I- <4~
    V
   > LU
                                LA
                                                 O O O O
                                                                     O  O O O
                                                                                         OO
                                                                                                       OOO
       CO
       LU
       £
                          I  U
                          C  fl)
                             UJ
                                      OO
                                                                                                       OsOCM
       o

       0.
LA    LU
00     £

LU     o
_j     Q:
£Q     —
       O

       z
       o
       <

       LLl

       >-
       O
       O
                                ^-N    CM
    t-  U
    IU  (U
   > it-
                       U  4) 4J
                       0)  V) U
                      Z  O
                                                 .— CM
                                                                     rr>-3-CMf\
                                                                                         OCM
                                                                                                       's- LA t»-\
                                X-N     LA
                                CM     —
                                                 LACMLArO
                                                                     — — CM —
                                                                                                       — -4-  O
                                                 — — CM —
                                                                     O CM O
                                                                                             CM
                 O
                -=f
                                                 o\oo
                                                                               CM
                                    co vo
                                     CM
1 Counties
p—
<


M
_J
^
^
O
h-
Q.
O
>- O
C4> o
C *
O 0
— o
4J LA
to
**••• L—
3 Q)
0. >
O 0
o.
0 0
0 0
O 0
00
O LA
IA CM
1 1
O O
0 0
0 0
* •*
O O
LA O
CM —

O
O
0
0
0

1
o
o
o
*.
o
LA


o
en
0)
Of.
O 4-*
.— (/)
-C (Q
Q. (U
n> jz
i- 4-1
01 t.
o o
(U Z
CJ
u
c
(U
o

J=
Jj
s.
o
z






f~
4J -t '
3 in
o 
-------
     
     LJ


     >-


     O

in


m 4J
3 O X
 W- C
LU LU —
0)
1 >
C —
— 4J
0
>- 0)
1_ 14-
> UJ
(U
>
4->
1 U
C 0)
— <4-
M-
LU
ro
V-
4—*
3
ft)
Z
(1)
>
4-1
U
0)
ll
«-
LU
0)
>
L- U
a) o)
14-
UJ
cn

CO *^



-^ CM
CM CO



— « CM
^ ^



r^»* w^"
^c f*^
'*-^




0)

4-*
O

V—
f—
<

«
(0
4-1
O
OOOvOCOr* -3-.3-t^cM
OOOLACMCO • — -3-vOtLA

II II II II II II II II II II

o o o — * r — o .^ i^ • — en
— CM CM CM ~ — —

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
ooor-~LAr~- oo — oo —
ooovo-a-LA o-vvor-~r~-


O O O O — CM CM*— OO





o o o •— LA LA ro co •— -3~



OOOCMvOOO COLA— CM




•— • ^ -^* vo co CM r^> oo -3" c*"v
— —



OCMOOCMOO •— VO CO CM




*-~ CO -^ CJ\ CM LA ^ rO O"\ ^~
CM CO CM CM CM




C
Q. O O O O O O
3 O O O O O •-
O ooooo en —
C3OOOOOLA OL U
O O LA O LA CM 4->
C-LACM.— O 4-> C
O O 1 1 1 1 1 •— (/) 0)
•— OOOOOO -C (0 O
4JLAOOOOO Q-0)
ro ooooo (DX:JCJ=
3«>OOOLAO O>L-i_3in
CL>LAOLACM— O O O O 3
CM OA — vO -3T LA
OA CM CO vO CO CM

II II II 11 II II

O CM LA r~.-3" O
CM CM CM

III III
CM • — vO rooo LA
CTlLALA t-~LACM


O — CM O CO O





O (Tl CM •— O O
1


• — CM CO CO O CO




O 1**- LA OO CO f—
•— ~ CM



CM \O «3" CO OA O




CO LA NO LA LA -^J"
.— .a- — — LA




4->
c.
U 1-
(U £0)
"1^. l_ «^ ffl
^^ fc— "^ IU
h- 4-1 (UUC
C > C (0
>- 0) O 3 2:
4-i C T3 O O 1
— •—me o —
O 0) J3  3 o)3c u nj o 4-1
 o
                                                      176

-------
CO
LU   O
_l   —

I   i
    <



•a

4-1
CO
3
,—
CO
>
LU




























1_
0)
-0
E

z





















U)
0)
c



i
c











i_

•—
4-J
u

4->
U

4-1
U
(U
>4-
14-
LU
<0
>
U
0)
Ul
en
c
._
4-1
1—
O

o»
cc










O

II

CM
CM

1

CM
CM O
-4-

II II

CT\ (^*
CM CO

1 1

^~ rn
ve o
VO O

II II

^ o
r—

1 1

m o
r~v i-^ coco o



, 	 ^
LA




^^
•4-

^-^
CO
-~*



_^
CM


^_^
C^




«-~^
<




























CM





CM


^~





CO,



LA





CO
i—






(/I
4)
.«.
4-f
C
^J
O
o

^~
f—
<

•V
»^
(0
4-1
O
(-



r— r-«





— O


O —





CM —



mo





I-— co










O. O
3 O
O O
1~ O *
C3 O O
O O
C "»A
O O 1
— O O
4-1 IA O
(0 O
— 1_ .
3 4) O
a > LTV
O O CM
fi-



o o





— o


o o





-T —



^ r— .





VO CM










o o
0 0
0 0
•» A
0 0
LA O
CM —
1 1
o o
o o
o o
A M
o o
O LA
^~

OOCMO OO OCM
LT\ O l"~ LA LA -3-

II II II II II II II II

OO-TO — LA OLTX
LA — IA CM CM LA CM

1 1 1 1 II II

oovoo — LA or--
O CO LA 1^ l~- LA VO



OOOCM CMO OCM





r-O— O — — — —


— o o o — o o —





O CO -4" •— VO CM •— -4"



OCMCM— ^j-~ O-3-





CM 1A f^s ^~ -4- -4" CM CM
,_ ^_




L.
0
HJ 1-
4J i. O
C C. 4-1 4->
o 

cc \- \t\  T3 C
O4->C 4J O O < —
— m a) co L. o E
-C ITJ O 4-> 4J 4J TO
Q. -3V) 1.4-IC £ 4J *J
OOOOO) 4->0)O i_ — —
(UZZ3 (U£Z O33
O X LL.
O
o

II

0


1

o
o



0





o


o





CO



_





^f




















o
c

c
=>

                                           177

-------
     I/I
     LU
     CC
     0
     UJ
     g
OO
CO
3
     u
     UJ
1
O — 4J
i- ro o
.— 4-( ro
> c CL
c oi E
ui E —
































i
1 C —
i- L. ro
4-> > c
COO)
— O c=



c
01
N
4-f
U


C
0)
N

•—
O




























I
-1

to
1
ro
i-
o
r



>*
4-*
"ro
c
(U
O-



1
0)
u

.M


1
•o
c
ID

to


T3
C
ro
_j

i
0)
Cfl
c
ro
L.
t-





L.
ro
£





ro
o
OQ




























•- O
CO
in
c -3-
ro

L- p**»
O -5T
4J


+
in
0)
? on
ro 'A
jr
u



^
in
O> CM
> r--

4-1



*
in
-o on

ro


•*•
o) r—
in oo
ZJ



in
C -»
1


•o
0)
•o
ro r~
0- CM
X
UJ

+
-o
u>

-3- LA







o so — o -a- oo
^








Q. O O O O O
3 O O O O O
O O O O O O
C3 O O O O O LA
O O LA O LA CM
C « LA CM •—
O O 1 1 1 1 1
— O O O O O O
4-> LA O O O O O
ro o o o o o

3 ID O O O LA O
CL > LA O IA CM —
O O CM —
O-
-3- -a- i — csi
•— -a* so LA
on CM o oo
CM — CM LA

LA o so on
LA -a- LA m






o en CM r-%
LA SO SO -4"






•K r^ -K -K
H sO -K -Ji







-a- en o so
f"** \jD r** r^«



oo oo oo oo




0"\ 1^* U\ lf\
-a- -a- -a- -3-






-a- on — CM
CSI CM f-\ CM






CM CM oo -a-
^r so LA m







fx. p*^ sO SO








C
0
O) •—
Q) ro
ac i-
4-1
O 4-1 C
— in O)
-c ro o
d. 0)
ro jz jc JT
U 4-» 4-» 4J 4J
en L. «- 3 in
O o O o o)
0) Z Z CO 3
C3
CM O^ •— sD -a~ *
on CM en \o m -K
ro o\ CM -a' oo on
-a1 -a- m CM -a* rn

r-. P~. LA LA-a- *






CO SO LA CM csl r^
LA LA SO LA SO SO






or-.— o CM -K
co so r~. o so -it
*—






SO CM •— LA LA —
r^x p*^ r*^« so r**« r*^«



-a- oo r>» o cnco
oo co oo oo oo oo




oo -a* on r^ P^ en
-a- j- -a- -a- -a- -a-






OO LA m SO -3" O
•— CM m m CM LA






so p-^ oo ^~ oo on







J- vO -3" OO O IA
p*^ so r*. P^ P*^ CM







4-1
c
0} u
0) c 0)
o. c — cn
>- i- •— ro
1— 4-1 0) O C
c > c - oi o 3 z:
4-1 C T3 C3 O
— — ro c o —
o ro ja o> i*- i —
^V-l-Q. OL-Ol-
O 4-1 3 0) O C 0)
I-CJ3T3 E>-3JC
4JO)3c i-roO4J
o)oto — o z o o
2: ii-
nus the proportion

E
0)
>

4-)
U
0)
u-
14-
0>

>-
en
0)
4->
ro
i_
*j
in

01
JZ
4-)
en
c

i_
01
T3
in
C
8
o
4J
L,
O
e
a.

*•—
1 J
L)
11)

l+—
UI

T3
0)
4-1
ro
3
,»
ro
>
LU























































t
01
>

4-1
U
0>
14-
>*-
0)
c

4-1
—
a>
c

i_
0)
T3

in
c
O
u





































•
„
c
o

O)
0)
ID
^
4J
l/l

L.
ID

3
O

4->
U
(D
a.
14-
O

in
u
0)
in
D

C
O

"O
(U
in
ID


in
0)
u
O
U
to















































in
c
0)
-a
c
O
a.
in
0)
L.
^~
t—
ro

c
O

•a

in
ro

0)
L.
ro

m
01

O
o
to
*
in
0)
O
U
in

X
4)
T3
C
•••
3
14-
s7)
C
•— «
C
ID
i
0)
4-1
ro
•—
u
*—
ro
o

o

J
>2
§

•Q
0)
L-
0)
•a
in
C
O
U
in
3
r~
•a
c
ro
„
^»
L.
O
o>
01
4J
(D
O

C


I/)
c
a>
T3
c
o
a
in
0)
L-

>


C.
ro

4->

m
in
0)

*
•K
                                                           178

-------







~<£
*tJ

Ul

*ac
t-
1

UJ
OJ
H
<




cs
c
ce
o.
< 0
Ul ,,
H1 "*
0 J-
nr* Q
^
> ^
UJ ^/)
£
0
u.
o

z
CO 3:
a.
Ul O
_j _j
< > '-5
1- Ul £
a i— i
o rj
^
i <
2S UJ
H
rj ,.
CD LJ
— UJ
cc 
UJ


u.
Q
t
• o
z



















u


_j
^
si
iU
Q
-U
u.
^
H—
2
ILI
3L
>

•J
H-»
_J
J3
^
a.

_,
2
LJ
^

u

'J
a
a
a.
^j
L/)

\j
>
^
^
^J
•o
^
l-<
'XI
1_
*r~
-u
^
UJ






^
J
^
'-O
'-£
.J

j.
_j

£
2
•— (
£
^
2
i— i
—
*
a.
— i















X
tf


j

•<


T*


*
2

r-^

X
.
2

—H



-,
•0

0




0
-t
J.





-^
0


0


0
3
0



in
in



,3
~4








o
o
•
a
o
n

i,
>
o

N

VJ



^-^
(*-


1N
— I



'1




.n


^t>




-n
in

y\




-p
^
n





n
•o


0


in
*°
—i





$•



"Vj
r*-


tn
r»j



•j\
->

•»

•n


^r
ro



•*•
*

-J-
M



a
M
J-J
— (




-^
ro


-3


m

5



-T
m
>^j


^
>f\





o
j
o
•J
n
•\^
1
o
7j
^
Q
b
•H

V

Aj



^N
f^


f\J
t/*



-A
-n

r-

-T
lit


y^
-o



0
m

j*
•n



^
-H
^.
•-J




i^
'N


•n


0

J



m
in
-r


v
•M
«4





O
^
;j
o
^
1
J
-J
J)
o
n


•f

r

o

J


1— 1
— t
r-*


1A
n

g*
p»



O
•N
O
•f




3-
•N


-t


r~

•o




-j>
—


^
N
U





a
o
-p
L^

1
r^
^
fj
n
^J


-

n



j
p—


-n
-\j
m


r^.
.•n

i;

a;


*j-
>j
IN


O
*

•a
33
i«4


•a
~*
T,
r^




-•o
^j


n
H

,o

.n



:N

'J
•H



0



o



o




o




o


o




o


o




o

o





o



o


o

o




3



0









-D
o
in
•1
•0

"i
u
z


























































































































































z
— 1
.3
^:

~J
H-»
J_
•\_
*i
^
o
-U
'J>
•^

'jT\



o
•^3


CJ
rvi
<-4


J^
'X\

^

u


1_>
0
rH


3>
i")

0)
^-



O
-M
,0
*•*




y\
^


n


m

?



^•J
^
»D


0
CJ
"g









u_
/>
q.
u
j.
^
~.l
-^

>•

'A



•T
•*J


~U
-O
(— (


-^*
-r

-H

£


r*
-M
•H


-(
"*"

13
O
r- 4


,3.
N
-,
^0




JO
—4


-0


^

o



•NJ
"4
r-


UJ
J*
fly






_J
t
t—
s£.
i^
-J

X
H
LJ
*~

•J

A



r\J
p-


r-«
•*r
r— *


•o
>"ft

r-

—4


Ul
'J
—1


-— t
^A

-T
J
-H


y,
-4
JO
"O




N_
rst


-Q
n


n

j
»H


-\i
JU
Jt


n
o
SJ













j:
^
CJ


"

*»



O
f^


o
03
(— (


•—I
-T

u>

£


l^l
(>4
•H


^
og

lA
tA



^
r- 4
to
(M




co
-o


-4


>T

•C
r- 1


ra
m



CO
^1
CM














VI
UJ
X


























































































































































kiJ
a
JT

^.
™
-4
IJ
^
'.T.
k—
ILf
£
-f

-0



^H
r*


CJ
rg
_4


(j>
•4"

»

!M


33
C3



3
*

-H
13



_T
^
-H
sj»




A
"O


n


00

—4
•H


-n
^
\y


T)
y
•H











_ J
.
^T











Z
<

00
z>
LO

-

rfl




<-4


r^-
-4
n
^




-\J
%J


33


»
-0
-0
-4


N
n
v!J


-O
-A
r\j







r—
JF
-0
3
~£
u
a.
J
^
—<

























































































































































5
^:

X
;>
T
6

u.

3;
•X

u.
T

0



-g
-o


CO
%J
r-«


J^
•T

*

V


•-H
0
rH


O
VT

^f-
CT



j.
-M
_3
in




-0
•M


5;


SO

!n



-C
o
•y


o
j
\jj






,J
o

-^
""5
j
1

>
<-.
-^

j

-H
— I


t~4
r*-


^r
'A
>J*


'\j
-T

S

-


••U
M
.">!


-O
-n

T\
M
OJ


^_
-H
r-
3
r-t



"0
N


0
—4

,,

C-J



••C
^
J
1— 1

rn
•T
jj





'j
•J>
"5
^
«—
r

r>4
J
"5
^
O

*

H



f*t
•0


r-
i— t



^o
j^

^

-r


'M
—i



-v
-n

-T
— i



"Si
"sJ
^





"Nf
NJ


0


,n
Q
^



,-n
o
-4



M









T
"3

j")
•-0
—•
i
^j
^j



o o



0 >
-T> LA


C_) sj"
M



>H r*~
-O tA

"•

^)M


o in
i-^



N m
r- ( •$•

1) f^




•O rO
•r
T-H rn





r*> ,7*
T~) *N)


a M


r-,-0
•33 33
A -^
r-4



^ 2
«-.



oo r*-
r-f





^
^_
aj
-» T
"H
"• X*
-U ^

3T ^~

E O.
a u


1.79

-------
>-
o
K

C9
Z



m


ii

§
u


...
o
'
•c
u
T:
"3

-14 T
:£ I—
j^
_J J
JJ X
U -J
•J. J
h- 1.
Z. '.
' J -°
s >
j *-
>3

>—
o ¥
ZJ LL
3- '-0
_l "-J
< >
O t-
iT .<:
** ,"''
"j» *••<
u -j
_) 0
-J .v.
r-H . J
< 0.
> X
•4 -L.

1
•t
-J
/>
•—4 r^
'J 0
-J !—
— J './>
< -J
X -a.
U U
— t I-H
.Z i.
Z> iJL
:t U
t :?
'OJ l—
O <
-J ~
< -H
5

I-H
I—
'5
t
u
















^

4
J

"^

«
.
_J
_.,

*


j
'I

.«
3
^

.j


j
^

*

0
0
A
^


5*


>'
^


5V

•
~t
^
^



J



—
2































































































i-



r-
^~

r-4

Jj
in

>
r*

*r
*n

r—
^
^n

o
**•

^
.M
^
i-1



0
•tf"


-N
-O

^
-0

1— t
a*



_,
•T
'
^


•O
i*l
-*


t—
-^
3
'J

j
_j
*4

•>
-J
*•'..
H>
O
H









































































































































ft.
3
a
•j

~£:
~_,
.-«
K
*4
„ J
13
a
™i
a.
i ^


-H



a>
x>

^

_^
>•

f.
-*

in
•^

rH
-4
1*.

^
—t

O
ri
.N
•H



f,
•0


0
•H

><1
X>

O
rsj



n


m
i-H

4"
Os|






,'^
')
M
'J
J
-J>


'JJ
J>
O

1 t

-4



N
jj

-

•u
^

j-\
-1

ti,
«x

*"*
^
•o

-r
rH

rH
•r
J.




T
n


o
rH

iu
O

in
rH



_,
•T

y>


M
iN




,.3
(J
rj
3
n
1
'j
' i
j)
»v
}
•A
r\J




J



U
i)

">

^
J\

j,
'M

•0
J\

M
^
•s1

rH
M

N
'M
•J
rH



'.0
i"1!


IN.
rH

-O
>

^
,V)



p.
T

rH
'M

Jl
r




i.j
-3
3
r>
•^
|
3
•3
O
4k
J
J
rH



N



N.
•a

m

^
sT

CM
'M

n*
>r

~>!
C3
T

^J
-^

^
-H
sO




.9
."0


•0
.H

If
N^

y
;M



-r
CM

rH
rH

m
^




j
3
-.3
0
-4
1
•J
J
3
4k
rj
in





T



<3




C3


J


a



..,


CJ


0

0




•3



0


O


0




o


u


o




o





CJ


o



— <

o
«\
CO




0
to


-.A
rH

JU
^

^
-^



^
>.r

(M
iH

P*
N








^4_
^1
•c.
JJ
4;
1—
.e.
U



"3

^



j-\
^>M

S


-r

!>.
-1

w
v

rH
^
sj*

O
-"

•n
'M
C."




^
?^>


•1-
rH

in
•O

o
N



•O
•M

rH
rH

U
•r





-J
^
iv
f
j
•j

j.
'^

LJ





J



rg
r*^

^


:n












2:
i_
•3

1.0




M



tj
^3

•NJ

P*
•O

O
CM

^
in

—4
^
f\

r~
rH

O
"^
CP




o
J^


m
rH

0
o

^.
.M



•n
Ul

-O
rH

O
ri)













r—
y)
^U
*













































































































































•/;
™
<>4B
•.q
h-
'ft

' J
ur.
t-
LU
X

"Si

N



in
"s..

~

ni
•O

(_,
>0

_
n

in
00
in

o
in

•n
fl
rg
m



•a
^


a
•r

N
r-

j»
0



•r
•r

(M
•r

•u
'j1












a
'(
H
'U
^




'Nj



-T)
OJ

S

"O
T

a>
— '

cu
•JT


in
m

*$•
-i

m
rt
m




o
.$•


3
rH

U>
in

CM
fM



in
"i

•3-
•H

O
»}•








•J

H-
'U
i.

^
U











































































































































-
£

'ij
>
w
£.

LL
LJ

y.
'X
o
IrU



•H



-\j
00

^

y<
-ti

m
-1


»T

rH
Q


CJ1
rH

a
*M
0
1-4



*
V)


'n
rH

0)


N
N



N
i'T

IN


03
,Y)






•a



•-H
UJ

S

•T


^
-T

^
M;

m
-n
•o

CJ>
•>>

^
'°
_,
.••J



-.0
in


in
1*1

Cli
>«

'f
•f



pr\
U)

•r


'M
•u



if


^



f*-
•O

•M

O
*n

u
•*

^
41

rH
-O
m

.M
-1

I"™
"•
i)




«1
ro


.M
-H

•41
'.n

o
N



•a
CM

3


0
rl





* P
z —
S ~
2
g
(— ^ ^
3

._
<^_
.— <
1



J.

r-,
I

•j
^j
*;
.,/
^
J

                                        180

-------
   'tl

USi
•aeiu*i
!D!N
                         -4N-4
                                            7> N
                                       O1^ *•
                       O O
                       rg|<-4
                                       O (M
                                              in
                                              m
                                  ^. i  ,   '  i   i
                                  O< K  •>: K|  »
                                       -N
                                no i  i  i
                                            I | I
                                            oio
                                                 00
                                0!0
                                                 0|0
                                                 o o
                                                 o»
                                                 o»!j«
                                                      0
                                                             m
                                                             oj rvt
                                                             fV< fft
                                                             Orva
                                                             
                                                                    M
                                                                    m
                                                                    
                                                 1  1  »   !•* -o UJ
                                       O O O O O O
                                                          , O-cJJ1
                            4N  |<|  .o o 0,0,oio f>\ct\  i;»:».»>. uj i  , aci^- it-t-

               a|>itf»:O
                                            !M
3jsni

11
                                                          IU
                                                            .10
                                                                              in
                                                                              mlrg
                                                                              HI
                                                                           CO
                                                                           (M
                                                                              (MIlM
                                                                              fM
                                                                                3)
 Ci»~
 atiari
 1-iLUi
 UIO
Ix
                                                                                IU
                                                                                l&
                                                                                ^
                                                                              5|5
                                                                                        N
                                                                       i*» (M
                                                                       CO
1
                                                                                        -M M
                                                                                          M
                                                                                             03
                                                                                            O
                                                                                          ift fO
                                                                                          .5

                                                                                        ^5
                                                                                        O
                                                                                               rt
O:2I-V"

 r!cp!
 : M !<->:
OiUJ
>-rac
                                                 181

-------














Ill

^1
u.
o
_J

G£
t—
z
UJ
u
1
UJ
X
»-
CM —
o\ ^
UJ V)
co o
< <
*- z
o
u
t
<_>
IA_
U*>
o
^
o
1
-J
S
UJ U.
a

•
o
;z















Q
11
!t
Ju
o
••M
u
3C
1

JJ
>


J^
i*cT
3





















V
LU
>


























Z
aJ
£


m
n
<


(*\
II

_j
as
3
JJ

~g
II

i2
i—
^
>/i


—i
n



'£.
»-*
i—
oC
o
a
5



























































-~
<
^*






















































































in
CM

N


*>
CNl







J
r1)






o
'J
^
J
.n
^,j
1
0
o
o
.-)
a
.-H






m
!M

-t


eg








^>
to





^n
!M






-H






30
r-






^
a
o
; ;
"J
-H
1

O
a
CJ
j^







o
CM

"°


«0








s.
>0





CO
•}•






r
•^




t«r(
0>






S






J3
.j\
.M





'o
O
0
-A
•M

I

O
a
-j
f— i







o


o


o








-^






o







0






o







o
:,}
O
J
f-l

I
CJ
^
J
•-n








o


o


o








o






o







0






o







o
o
o
^


1
o
•— *
JS
tM








O


O


o








o






o







u






o










o
*5
in
^
"M

J.
(J
^*
o


















































































































•2

*— i
;J
i

LJ
•—*
X
n.

!J
O
J
o





m
M

-O


^








,—4
in





CO
m






2






in
T«-f
^










r-
y^
^
U
J.
cc
.D
•z






m
CM

oo


^









^}
1-1















,/?
'j.i
TJ:




















































































































-U
a
H

>.
h-

^j
'N
T:
^M
'.JJ
3.





•T
CM

^


-n








^o
•4-





CO
>.r






TV
.H






u^
r-l
>^












1
<{
rf»
H"
'J
O






r*
eg

•-i


-0
•H







•T
-o
rH




CO
•^






i-l






CO
in

^
^

a.
'->
7T
•3.
•^ J
LL





m
CM

-0


03








O
-o





^*
JV






OJ






t>_
un
r- 1







^H

-^
^5
"n
^
•1
i
V
<3,
^r






in
CM

1


O
(-1







s.
CO
r-l




<7*
•-t
1-1





^






to
r**
f^)





Y|
JJ







N
-4






^






O
r*^










•rr
Ij
—4
'-^
i/]
-*
2.
i j
(^)






O
rn

•H


CM








in






ro







0






r-H
f-4









-^
»— <
'—
J-.'
-J
^r

i;
O
r—i






O
CM

—t


,-3








O






— 1







^






01






•*
h-*
H-
!.U


^
5
___
w.

a.
•j
TC

182

-------














UJ
o
iZ
u.
o
_i
2;
o
3
Ul
ce
1
a.
UJ
X
0^ 3
Ul V)
_ 1 1
•J f^
to o
£ 2
•x.
o
0
r
o

u.
o
o
1
^
J>
UJ U.
o

•
o
z













a
01
••
X
^
•^
LU
*
£
_5
Qi
UJ
>


^
3
















>
"€~
'jf

























z
<
Ll 1
x


in
il

HM
t—
•Q,'
!/>
^
II
*-4
t-
v^

II

_J
*
JJ

II

:/)
»™*
1—
<


— <
It

(/)
—<
1—
3
O
.2
t— «
_w
a
o
a.

(£




















































*^
<
•^















































































•T
•
CNJ

CM



pH
-t




ij\
in
!M


^
^}
m




s
•-4





r-
C\j
!*•





I/)
jJ
!-• f
1—
bv4
o

_j
_i












O
•5
•«
t?
'-n
-V>
^>
c^






p-4
'V
o




0





-o





-H





0






^o
•™4







0
o
^
o
o
A
1
J
'J
3
*^
."\|



^


•r
•\j
*^t
F-t




in





m
r-4

)

.
CSJ





U>






ou
%^







o
(J
o
CJ
•n
.*.»
1
'-j
'j
0
rH






m
*N





sf





f\j
ro



O
^"





tn






o



o
**•





^






tj
^»
rH






^>
a
0
j
n

1
0
.3
n
">J







«r

N
-«




'N




•a
t
r-t


rsl
in
r-4




in






Cl
tr<
n)






Q
-J
"^>
n
M

1
?
(J
"J







3

a




o





o




0






0






f^








o
^J
-">
•J
•-4

1

^








O

o




o





o




o






•J






'J








-p
o
"3
n


1
•J
^s








a

o




0





o




o






J






(J











o
"•}
n
•.
^
j
~*
^3









































































































^j
>*^
L|


O
r^
X
j.
•a.
-J)
U
JJ
O





•r
(M
•O




m





fV
'n



^
«n





;^






C3
•^r
i~4











u*
o
J
X
T
j
^i






*
OJ





in
—4




s^»
IS,



CO
o
"•




<\J






P-
t>J
t\|








-J
ij^

^.
^
Ju
JI
~
u
i£






•f
*
O^




^





in
t--



^
•JU





m






in
*— !
r\4













r
h*-
UJ
i-O






m
(^
•«•




(VI
1— t




CO
m



,
—
•s
->:
, — ,
u
'*•





T)
*





r-n





*5
•r



-t
r*»





•ri






r^-
^
— i













-i

'-i^
r^









f—
^r
J
~i
U
t-J
xj
f— »








































































































h-
,U
"C
^
^
;>
^
'^)
a.
a:
X
*j
LU





r»»
f>^





r-





^
•o



r\(
CO





N






,*—
'jy
— ^








_j
"j
~y
.5

.3
•i
u
• J
--•^
•s






*r
,.
o
^



^
CM




>n
CO
rH


'^

-------








Ul
0
LL»
u.
o

2
Z
Ul
0
1
OL.
Ul

(T. (/>
Ul O
— 1 <
03 P
< 2
1- 0
U
1—
z
o
o

LL.
o
o
£•
=>
Ul

u.

•
o
Z













a
a.
0
UJ
5
1
i
a:


5















--
^























jj
S

m
il
§
-T
2


,— *
u
00
~
1/1

2
,— ,
H-
2tC
a
a
UJ
oc












































-*
-

























































































Ci.
5
»-H
t—

f^



.n
N









"^
»•
-H
1
J
'_>
J
•l
n




o


o

o




0




0






_;
»
,*,




o


o

0




D




0





'->





-,










?
•>
1
J
•"5
6
«
— i




o


o

o




o




o





'->





_










^
il
-H
1
O
"^
'_3
M





O


Q

0




O




0





'J





0










o
o
o
/
^
o
^
•
N




u


o

o




0




o





-•





o











c
9-
\J


~
-^
—

























































































•^
Z
u
T
•\
*^i
-
"
i
t3


O
"'

O

n




^4




n





•^





P.
— i










i-
•y
it
i
^_
—

^



"J
OJ

-H

r-t




•T
*~H




~n





rn





^
,^J










u. .
CJ

I
'—

X



-r
^

o

-,




*




•J^





"•-1





•n
.M













_j_
—
-
s



.M
.%

3

^




-r




-^r





-11





-M
_














.—
"_
jC



























































































'/i















--
"7
x



CT>
^

— <

r-*




0
r— t




N





— i





r-*
"M










-
i —

^

^,
£.

























































































•^r
•z
z:

u^
^J

^t
'^J
a.


u\
V

a

o




5




r-





.-u





-i>
f\J





cc.
c
1—
<
a.
\-

-------











UJ
u
n
ti.
o
1

<9
UJ
CC
\
0.
Ul
1
in 3
"^ „,
UJ 1-
— I O
CD <
£ £
H o
'U
£:
z
=>
o
o
u.
0
0
|
5!
> 0.
UJ O
.
o
z















Q
O)
h-
U>
JJ

II
H
'I


I

5




















f-S
>

























2
OJ
*"

"A
II
1-
00
^
II
t~H
h~
<

*"
_j
a;
t-
^ij


CM
II

->
1—
•X
">

_,
1|

^
M
H

^
r— 4
H-
OC
•— l
o.
-U
a:






















































*«•»
2

















































































>A
^

•A

•JQ





•M
sj-






'-/•
v-0





n
-H






u
r-H




•yi
— 1
t —
S
•_>

_J
_J
—
*i
^
'X
LJ
O.




m
(M

O

CM





^







0s






"O







rH
C\J









•3
O
•*
O
" J
'-*\
^
J
^
LJ





r-l
tM

— 1

— 1





0







r«-






-T







-H







Q
o
75
-^
5
'-H
1
•J
j
">
0
n
M





m
,M

N

,_,





a»







•r\
-1





in








o
:/>
rj
I
j
-J?

•J
D
^H





r-

A
"M






O


0

o





o







o






-J







"*







o
o
o
A
"M

1
o
o
•-J
J
.H






0


a

o





a







j






j







J







o
o
a
0


I
.3
'_5
l'J
iA







0


•o

o





,-.







G






w







~*







O
'.J
^


t
'^
o
J1
^J







o


o

o





0







o






,_,







o









j
--3
CA
c
~VI

-'
_J
-^
5









































































































-,
'5

,,.

i_^
i— i
X
a.
^
j
'_j
OJ
O




^
^



(M





,-,
t-t






—t
-1





r-j







••M











±*.
^
<±
^j
_l_
^7
-_)
21





-O
^

CM

iM





-n
rH






O
—4





f<)







*J)
l<»








_J
X

X
J
<_J

—
^_
' J
^





-r
(M

r-l

^





^
—1






M
rH





^.







.^















X
"5
^1
^/)





fn
M



_,





x>







x>






j







M
















•OO
V*J
jj:



































































i








































cy)
rrj
i—
-Q.
w*
*y>

^
^«.
'jj
— •




".'
IM

m

.,,.





T
CM






n
ri





rxi
n_^






>o
r-















•-'
i —
. — i
51





CO
(M

-M

•N





r-o
r-l






-O






-"I







ni











, )
2
u«
: J
5-
--'„
LJ
i?









































































































^
^j
X
U
>
. — -
•3

X

^
,^.
'_j
u.




^
-M



M





vO
^-4






— (
— t





1T>







iO





O
1-
^
1—
Z
5
o
^

*w
-•^
•--''
li
*— *
a:





^
CM

rg

ro





rf)
rH






^»
r-l





y.







-r






0
i—
or
—
z
^
Q



i
F-«
j;

                                          r\j
185

-------


t-
u


i_ UJ
z >
UJ —
LU




»—
^ >' >-4! i^l
— < nc
_i X
i
• LU
SO 3C
O
uj oe u.
a* > °
< z .
t— LU
*^ 0
3! ~
UJ
O
UJ
u.
o
UJ
o
o
at
0.
y.
LM
_
o





Jt



























««•«
at

fM
Z

t—
-s:
<

8*
CO

9
a
z




*^
QC <
O_

Q*
UJ
ae











































































go
>o


"1
T
(T>




CW
•O
{J
~*






I/)
UJ
•"•
»-
u

_J
^^

«,
-J
0
(T\

p.
<^





fk.


CT1
~4


O
•n

M
vu





i*-\\r4

<«4








tM








0 0 O


a o
a

r
0 O



U



o


0






o










^J
o
o



O



•O


O






^














rg -•
ill
u o o o aio

1
O
in
»
O ' *M
O O O O OiO'O;
0 0,0 O OiOl-n ac
»! « >.,•>*>
o'o.o m
m o mpo4
pg -H






0
^



m



•ILL!
"XiQ



z









































































z
o

o
UJ
CC


o
ao


rg
2


o
tM

V
•f





^4
%y
fM












,_

^" V*
•a


rr»
rg


vO
PI

rg

^4




in
1-4
(O










J
QC
Z
•-« uO.UJ
~r* <( i LJ
0. UJ
irt


•4-

v*
o





i
*»•
in r*


-t
,y

,„
O
^




_^
^O
'M
















«aix;i x.
cc
o
a
UJ

1—
ae
O
Z

l_
at
t-


—4
tn

r-
r«»





„,














m
r*j

















t-.
ZI> 




















O1 O Uji
z

to

2g
|































Ul
3,
H

\~
«MI
O
>»
a
3£
t-»
UJ
r

in
^


•r
CO


m
m

fO

*^




r-
09
•^














_j

o


V






CO


w
•T

in
«M
—1




^.
i-4
fl











j_
OJ
0
z z

rvi










-1
U
5
a

•i
at
a
>»
^
£



rn
p»








ac
Ul
o
~z.
^
1
^J
1
m
P»


•^
r\4


^
<"M

13






fM
ro













5
•-i
UJ
I
Oi
CO C9|

1
fHl>O
CM


rn
^

ro






•T
 £
VJ -«
2;
^3
O
U

a:
21
C3
O


Z
sr
h.

•
Q.
UjUJ
^>

QC

186

-------
      CO
      Ul
                J'-^i
               *M
                  an
               « LUl •"•' O1
               XI ac LUI
   LU    9*


   LU
LU 1-4

>( ^!
j»! • i il —J —l!
^lr UU ^*] ' '

ic oc ui z
                             a
                             
2
^,
txj
^


oi

o
09
p-
f\J
0
rg
eg
^
m

in
rg
O
o u
o o: Oi o
<~t
co
^
^
0-
-4
rg
"

^
in
O
o oio

o

o

0

o


o

o

o

0

0


o

o

0

0

o



0 00
o. o o
ooo;o"oitfvoino
|o o vn o m
Z J m rg ~.>
Oi c? | S | lit
1-1 0
K— 1 m
3«
^' LU
•' in, o u-\
o o rg
al 1
*^



 LU
rg a
Z


3

                                                                    z
                                                                    o

                                                                    d
                                                                         ao
                                                                      
                                                                          %
                                                                            in
                                                                               CO
                                                                      in
                                                                         ro' W'
                                                                         (NJ
                                                                               «n
                                                                         >u u\ tn
                                                                      o in
                                                                         o,
                                                     CLl UJl
                                                    I -*! x! _,
                                                    I at! t-  H»
                                                     O| at; oci Ol to
                                                     O( O  O| 0| uul
                                                           Z| V)t 3t|
                                                                              I
                                                                                        •O> O9
                                                                            rvi! tr>
                                                                         (sil !o|pr>
                                                                                            .! o; oj CO
                      - r\i
                      ?|CN|
                                                                                                                  in
                                                                                                         in
                                                                                        m
                                                                                        og rg
                                                                                                      (NJ
               a: «
               tutu

               oi
               o
                                                                                                    u.
                                                                                           oc
                                                                                           UJ

                                                                                           3
                          o
                          rsi
                                                                                                                  LU

                                                                                                                  LU
O'l-Z
-«|LU X|
to! LU|o
                                                                                                            £iZ
                                                                                                            z: x OL
                                                                                                            o oiuj
                                                                                                            o H- oe
                                                          187

-------
       UJ
z


<
to    z
en    LU
UJ    '_!

-1    
                                                                                                                  0
                                                                                                               a
                                                                                                               X
                                                                                                                      n  n
                                                                                                                  'M
                                                                                                                      CNJ
                                                                                                                            « o
                                                                                                                            IN HH
                                                                                                                         -J

                                                                                                                         O

-------
      UJ UJ
      O <£
      UJ <
      fl£
      UJ M
UJ    I- U
-I    01-
CQ    UJ <•
      °|

      UJ "~
         §
         i
                      ijj
                         III
                             73
                             .-a
                                   in
                                   n
                                             •1
                                                o
                                                O
                                                u
                                                   IN
                                                   O
                                                   w
                                                   in
                                                   ro
                                                      •N -H
                                                         CM
                                                      -0
                                                         en
                                                      o
                                                      IN
                                                      0} (N
^ f-
   in
                                                         (N
                                                               o
                                                                   CJ
                                                                o
                o
                o
                'n

                .-N
                                                                   m
                                                                                      HI
                                                                                         o
                                                                                         (N
                                                                                   0)
                                                                                      CO
                                                                               O
                                                                                X5
                                                                                -f
                                                                                •O

                                                                                N
                                                                                         in
                                                                                   N
                                                                                      en
                                                                                      •o
                                'N
                                                                                      CO
a


UJ



u
rH
X
a
                                                                            u
                                                                            ai
 •z.
  j
 o

. X1
                                   u
                                   3C
                                                                                                     aj

                                                                                                     •M
                                                                                                         0
                                                                                                         IN
                                                                                                  in
                                               •.N
                                               ^
                                                                                                  N
                                                                                                         .•n
                                                                                                      -o
                                                                                               UJ

                                                                                               a.
                                                                                                         z
                                                                                                         u
                         S;
                                                                                                                              |U
                                                                                                                  IN



                                                                                                                  UJ
                                                                                                                            '.n
                                                                                                                     •--3
                                                                                                                         CN
                                                                                                                         O
                                                                                                                            •J
                                                                                                                         (N
                                                                                                                  ,-n
                                                               >n
                                                                                                               i-

                                                                                                               ijj
                                                                                                               •a;
                                                                                                               •ij
                                                                                                               u_
                              •X
                              u
                              UL
O
•n



T
J
•H
u


•J
                                                                                                                         .2
                                                                                                                            'J
                                                                    189

-------
       to

       o
       Ul

       o
       oe
       a.
o

to
I-
o
o
f     g
       Ul
       oc

       Ul
       o

       to
       ee
       o
                      I
                     •3»
                        •4J


                        •g.
                 o
                 z:
                     x
                     •jj
                  a:
           x
                     o
                  •o
                     z
                     'U
                         -u
                                   o
                                   -o
                                   -0
                                   o
                            in

                            m













a
o
a
a
a
a.
•H
-
-
fH
fH
iH
•H
5
00
(Nl
fSI
-N
0
O
*

•3
0
O
m
a
(JU
-H
"\J
•°
N)
^
5
o
o
o
'.M
."0
(M
O
U
0
o
n
1
o
o
m
•H
*
^
^
o
X)
•H
O
O
•H
n
•H
•a
•o
o
I
0
o
o
0
o
rH
u,
-0
30
-
n
£
M
33
r
5
**•
?
o
o
•3
3
O
— I
1
O
0
•n
rH
*
-H
H
-•
O
-"I
f\
"O
•n
*
-j
!Q
CO
o
0
o
0
m
i
o
o
o
c"\l
^
-H-
•H
•O
n
o
3
-o
-
•"-
?
-^
Tl
fH
O
o
.-NJ
1
o
0
a
w
-
o
o
o
o
o
o
a
o
o
0
-
o
o
o
o
fH
o
"^
J
«
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
•J
0
0
o
o
o
0
o
m
"
°
VJ
-
0
o
•J
0
0
o
o
0
0
o

o
0
-n
'NJ
«:
D
                                                                                                           i\)  O
                                                                                              -T
                                                                                    VJ





                                                                                   -T
                                                                                       -it
                                                                                              r*>
                                                                                              >n
                                                                                'J
                                                                                OJ
                                                                                X
                                                                                a.
                                                                                 x
                                                                                       •O
                                                                                                        A
                                                                                                           •-J
                                                                                                            co

                                                                                                            e/i
                                                                                                                                n
                                                                                                                                    -\i
                                                                                                                      m
                                                                                                                                o
i-n




•CO
                                                                                                                             ••i
                                                                                                                                       o
                                                                                                                                       '.->
                                                                                                               s:

                                                                                                               •x
                                                                                                                   73
                                                                                                                   Zj

                                                                                                                   -I
                                                                                                                   u:
                                                                                                                   • J
              'JJ
               u

              7C
                                                                                                                                 a.


                                                                                                                                 ac
                                                                                                                      LL
                                                                        190

-------

1—

H u'
0 >


-
*•»
ac
.s


z
Ul
1—
t~






V)
M
UJ






«-« VI
^C **"C' Q£i **•*
1 x
_l
H
Z
o z o
— o
cc. *
UJ — n
_l > ~
BO Z *
< Ul
-j
2?
Ul
Q
Ul
U.
0
ce

o.
UJ
f\

^_

o
o
JE






01
'0
z
1-4
CC
o
PL
i TTi
1 .i*

















UL
















„


nr


t
a
z
<

(K

00

•
O
z



<
«^































































>o
>o


vn
«
*«H


^
(T)


^
in




O*
in








i/)
UJ
^
2
O
u

j
ct

1

^_
o










































































Ou

O
CC
13

Z
O
••*
h-

^
J>


Q
-«



CO
m


^
•^




^^
PSI












o
o
o
•
o

m

UJ
o-i>
U
a.
O
U
in


c\j
—4



0
lf>


f>4
«-«





rn



rj
rn


*O
— t




Q
in










o
o
03


QT*
*



0
! *r ft. W M »
o o o o
o sn o. in
m rg I>H
III

0



u




o



CJ





^^











0
o
•^
in o in
r^ »>^
1
1

1
O



o




o



C)





^3














0
o
j
in















O



^
ro



to
>«y


r\j
n>




*O
-O







ex:
O £L
sj-
|^>


(Nj
n



SO
OJ


^H
<~«




n
*









1- 0
< i-
a: <
K— ec.
fn ^.
— CO
— Z
^ ~"
a
<
H-
•3
O
1—
>-H
•£
2.
a
z


>—
)_|
3
3C
ij
^
"-
v:
^
3
191

-------

a
UJ

a
UJ
UJ


H
X »
«* 01
X
CO
III

i
r>
0
u
*- ^
**•* ^*
*5
Q I
UI
3
Ul
CJ Ul
o a:
lu H G
I *^
^j ^^
OQ Ul «
«< Z Q
r~ p z
^
i—

i—
o
Q.
y
•—
2
UI
a
Ul
u.

ac


a
UJ
g
V3
^
M

^




^^ O
UJ





UJ
•"•^
^;

.5

?Hf

ca

;>i CO| «
ujj M a
ct


















ul 23



Z




3-
QC|r y
r-4






^
CM









'"">
d
r\fi r**
uu
a
z
0
»»4
»-
«l
1
— 1




^
in


fi
*H






,,
01








O
^
— i
&\




&
rn


o
fNl






^
tn








o
0 0
00
30
,$•




0
fM


^M
>-*






O
1|O








o
o





o



o







o1









0
o






0



u







o









0
o
o





o



u







o









o
o! o!
o





0



o







Q









o






0



u







o










o o O' o o o; o
























































3"
a
P"4
o o O! o o o; o o
O O
01 O
w in
ol i
o o
10 g
rv» A
tD1 ^*! O
a.; >!  C^ O
o o; m
Oj«i!M
o
in
•H




O
m


o»
•^






09
m











>nl O >A O; i QC
rvl ~« Oi '
'in! M»-
1 | |! « i-c(lO
o o o n at <0 i.
Oi mi r>j
11
a
a
!
i
-)
r-
o
m




(T>
CM


rj
*«^






f^
^










«•
^
sd GO
"
m




,3.
»\


*\
••*






o»
"











^*i
1
XI X
kw L«
-r
— H




rg
in


}•




g>
f»l


^o
C>J






vO




^
o
i—
o
ml




fM
rn



a
13
U.
u
cz
t-
r>
CJ
T~
0]«
M 3E
«4
3_. ADMfNI!
^CMN
H-
1
192

-------
      z:

      o
      CC.
o


w    ^
_J    Ul
CO    O
      Ul

      o
      OC
      o.
      3
      O
                      I—
                      o
                   
'-J
-
.-3
rv
M
1
-
0
J
0
o
-
o
0
o
•o
o
-
*-*
CJ
o
—4
-J
.n
^
"
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
-
-
'-J
-
o
o
1
"3
.•M
U
°
O
0
o
0
o
3
o
'3
•3
SJ
o

3
•J
LJ
                                                                         15
                                                                               ro
                                                                               CM
                                                                                  •f\
                                                                                     O
                                                                                     vO
                                                                                            X.
                                                                                                  O
                                                                                                  o
                                                                                                  -o
                                                                                                  O
                                                                                                         •5;
                                                                                                        u
                                                                                                            m  o r-
                                                                                                            in
                                                                                                           z: i-
                                                                                                           Q CO
                                                                                                                  j£
                                                                                                                  t-J
                                                         193

-------
•ca

H
-i u>


?£
LU Z

Ii
o u
cc
      UJ >

      O UJ
      ui p*

      u.

         UJ
      UI CC.
      o
      UI
      -3
      o
      o

      UI
         u
         <
               UJ
                    OC
                       .J
                  Q
                            tM
                            
«
.-4
•.'1
*
r-t
o
O
0
•3
-J
lA
1
Q
•3
O.
A
fM

'•A
rvj
ut
O
O
0
>r

M
*
5
'A
O
-r
CD
O
o
o
o
0
^A
f\j
1
O
o
"3
rj
•H

ni
Ct)
*
O
o
'A
»

ro
*
^»
0,

^i
*
r-t
O
0
0
o
^>
i~4
1
CJ
o
o
'A


u

u
o
o
o
0


o
(J
-
CJ

0
o
o
0
o
o
(A

t
o
o
H
8


J

o
o
0
a
-J
~)

o
a
o
o

VJ
O

^j
O
•r\
'•M

i
O
O
o
-^


'J

o
o
o
o
o
o

o
o
^
o

'J
a
o
^
o
0
—4

1
•J
o
'3
(A


0

°
0
O
o
3
o

0
'J
o
o

0
0
o
CJ
3
•A


1
'J
o
'A
CV4


O

u
o
o
0
o
o

o
o
0
o

o
a



o
^
lA
t.
CM

ex.
a
3

                                                                      CO
                                                                      M
                                                                      in
                                                                         o
                                                                         lA
                                                                         to
                                                                            ••O
                                                                            •a
                                                                                       ."NJ
                                                                                               -O
                                                                                             0
                                                                                             s;
                                                                                               •Nl
                                                                                                  o
                                                                                           2£
                                                                                           £ CO
                                                                                           o —
                                                                                           < z


                                                                                          t— a .
                                                                                                     IT
                                                                                                     N
                                                                                                     .M
                                                                                                  ,5
                                                          194

-------








C£.
UJ
I
H
O
«








V)
t-
_l U
< UJ
z o
UJ ce.
TC. o-
z
o >-
DC H-
> 3
U\ Z O
O UJ O |
_l Z *••
ui 
p iii -^-

0 1-
co H
OC (/>
o
3C 1-
H" O J,.
<2 rH
Z £
— X
. o

LU
X























1

UJ
ST
'jT
3£
'.XI
>
3


'-U
a
r-«
CO
t—

U



-t
'Ju
^1
r—
_J





_1
.
_
\—
a.
u



i—
^
.j
i—
^£
v
co
w

.
o

•n


3^


_ *
^
cr

j*


§
a
^
O)


0*


9
!_J
-


aj

-J*


•3-1 •
-ill'-)
-•3



U
^J
""
"*»
a.
a

jj


















•"£

•D

•i*


*
~1
•—

03
























































































^

iT



1*



in



-o
CM

•T
rH



H
•T

;
cv
CM





UJ
•M

in
rH




r-t


^O











^Q
ro

in





r~-


«H




'T
rH







0
-O
•I
o
_)
-T\

X
u'
7>
' 	 )

m

-T



r^»
rH


CN



r-
-*

txi




00
vn


f»






m
CM

rr>





-Q


rH




2




~>
O
o
-}
o
_n
1
-j
o
o
•
D
u"N
(M

vO

•^



^
rH


(M



^
rH

ro




•rv
C^


•^*






r-H
•n

in





in
•M


v^




.-H
.



O
CJ
O
c,
n


^3"




^
f~4


"^






r**
-^

r\j





( j


fj




rH




O
o
o
J)
0
<-^
1
•_J
o
o
•l
:J5
A


O

u



o



o



o


D




O



o






'^J


o





o


• J




o




o
J
a
j
.^

i
-j
0
^
»
..T
NJ


0

•-»



-3



Q



o


o




o



o






o


o





'-3


0




o




3
3
0
.r\
•^J

1
^ >
o
o
*
~ 1
•H


O

a



o



o



0


0




o



o






IJ


o.





o


o




0




o
•J
o
o
_l

1
;j
*3
^_3
•i
•n



°

•j



o



0



0


o




o



o






o


CJ





o


o




a




'->
O

u



o



0



0


o




o



o






o


0





o


'•J




o





°i
D
-,


1
'O
CD
.n
•*
-.j




J
o
n
»
-^

jl
JJ
'J
<:
~^





























































































































z:
•^
r-4
7*
l-

o
—i
<
Q.

t'O


(M






cvi
rft

(M





r-


rH




^









t—
.0
<^
J
a-
r«>
i.
O
^

rH

0)



CT»
rH


n



m
CM

^




rH
m


L^






in


>*•





o


— (




rH






J
5
r-
•^
J
__)

J^
r—
"^
LJ
^

r-

•*"



r*»



rH



M
ro

•n




'O
.-n


jn






rj
rv

;t^





'•M


•r




•H













J_
, —
13
_3
^

IN

1*4



O




vf»


o
rH





in
-0

-o





CJ


:^J




1—
rH














r>*
O
'J
i

































































































































y.
^;
L«.
— I




<«•
-H


*-V




T













'^
X
r^
.J
^

0
rH

•^



a



o



0
n

en




o
(M


CM






tj
rtl

^





0


o




r-l









-~1
:t
u^
U
i.

^
1-J
^





























































































































^
_J
7»~
2
""i
~»
•_j
L^

UU
i_J

2.
^i.
t_j
U.
-U

T



JS



rH



CO
•H

.\J




r-
N


m






•i)
n

Sf





P— I


f\j




— H
rH

OC
«*

m



^



ro



s
(M

j>




rt>
in


r-
-H





— i
-o

CJ
^ .




-j.


•"n




'M


CO

IN



0*



rH



r-
rvi

ifi




*
rH


N






xf*


rH





V


^




rH


0
cc o

 ^
— QC
z h-
— to
o z
^ ^
z
f— ^t- .-2^

--J
T;
t—
>— 1
JS

3

X
t—
r-4
-g

>
^
^
,£
~^

195

-------
      CO
      a.
      UJ
      a:
      LU
      z:
      LU
      to
>O    O
o    <
•—    ft.

Ul    —

CD    _l
      r:
      o
      ec
      UJ
      £
      o
                    U
                    UJ
                 OU.
                 ZU,
                    01
                 o u
                 UJ LU
                 -Ji!
                 _»!o'
                 "i?!
O r-
01 Oj
V Ol|

_i:3i
UJ c£.
00.
   tu
02!
tg't-i
-Ci
bo'u.
Z «4

UJ O:
(VjlrHl
                  r-t!<|
                  o a
   3!
  • X
O 01
LU >!
   £*'
o a.
nt:
                 oi
               011-
               w. ..'

               < r-'- -
               X X  01
           o
           CO
                            m
                            in
                            mi
                            in
m
           o
           NO
           ON
           in

           er\
           OI


           u

           _J
           -I






















ft.

n
Pf
CL.
0

^
<5
H- 1
r-
<
•J
0.
o
.H
•"•
1*4

O
O
.*•
•t
^

vO
in
in

(O
co
m
«*•
•t





Q
O
0
•>
o
Q
in
ff
UL~
>
O
^
"*
N

00
rH
in
™
Ov


NO
03

m
m
*
f\)
*
in



o
o
0
•h
(^
o
in
l
o
Q
0
o
in
fM
m
CM
ON

(O
r-l

in
O
CM
NO
in
o
CM
rH
CO
rH
rH
^,

•O

ON

CT>

>$•
(N)

O
O
o
O
0
rH
0

CM
N
N
rH
1-4
o
o




ON
ON
ON


1
O
O
O
o
in

t*

0
m
NO
in
m
•*•
^
(0

*
j.
CO
in
rH
rH
in
rH
CM


00

ON
ON
ON
Jr

1
£3
O
o
in
r\J

CO
ro

N.
CO
oo
in
CM
•*
ON
rH
rH
f.

o
o
rH

Q

0

o
o
o

o

0

o

o

o
o
0

0


ON
O>
ON


1
*3
O
O
in


o

O

o
0
o

o

o

o

o

o
0
o

o

ON
ON
ON
.j.


1
O
n
in
CM


O

O

O
o
o

o

Q

Q

O

O
0
O

o




o
o
ijA
•»
r^

0£
i^U

^
3
                                                      T
                                                  eor-lN1!
                                                   i m NO
                                                                          • NO
                                                                        «*• m
                                       NO NO O CO!
                                       i-t;J-iin •*
                                                                   -H CM in rH
                                                                           m
                                               CO
                                                                   O CMN
                                                          in
                                                          CM
                                       O (O 00 ON
                                                           41
                                                       00
                                                  rH rH rH CM
                                                                   ON f-
                                               o
                                               CM
                                                                      N
                                                                 oil
                                    Oir-l*
                                    *-« LU
                                    x,< o
                                   ia. LU'
                                   ,< X X
                                    0£ r- r-
                                    O a^ rr!
                                    a 0,0
                                                      , CM joO 'O^
                                                      |CM (O fM
                                                    !  !    ..
                                                                                                    !«-i oo
                                                                 01
                                                                 (3
                                                                    KZ
                                                                        •n
                                                                        'to
                                                                    i!ini«o
                                                                  O ON
                                                       CM rH rH
                                                                                      ON
                                                                                         CM
                                                                                         m
                                                                                   j-JiSS

                                                                                    CC CO
                                                                                 a: ^
                                                               lOI
                                                               Isi
                                                                   UJ o
                                                                   (Ji-co .
                   I'O!
                   >jo,
                                                                                HiOO fn rH rHi
                                                                                                 O f>
                                                                                03,03 rH O O
                                                                     rH!^) O CO O
                                                                       :«t!ini
                                                                     v*iin ao   a::
      |°|3'i!
       u- l •'",
                                                                                o
                                                                                7!
                                                                                rH

                                                                                OI
                                                                             O Oil
                                                                             'r*:*l
       rlv
       o:i<
       °Fi
       0.1
liiUI
OiOIOI
uir-ia:
                                                    196

-------













Ul
r—
0
^
to
_
O
Ul

UJ

>
Ul
ee.
I/)
z
11 1
Ul
1-
H
«/>
I-* 1-
0 0

o.
Ul f.
CO ~
< -1

Ul
z
o
cc


UJ

— 1
2
Ul
I?
|L
° uJ








o
UJ,
0 LU
Z U.


O
UJ
_l
-
*

Q
UJ
1-
o



UJ

a.
a.

^_



UJ, O;
5! T>
_l 0
ui a:
Q




a.


LU
£
0 "
UJ 1-
X
3
O
U













U.J
u.!
i-
(/>


a
Zi -H
UIIO
N M
r-l
h-
M
O


}M
O
UJ

a
ee.
Q.


Q
Ul

HI
t-
tt
^
a.
t-
z
y
Ul
>
ac
a.
Z
p^





t- 55 > to
o «r
S i
u.
Ul









IU
ee









h-l
Ul





















M







It




2
^


























o!
ro

o
r-


r-


•0
r-l

PO
«*•
















ON















































O*





o
«f

(M



«
M


J0H
in



CO
N


If
N£





H
to
(N


I/I
Ul
IM
r-
o

^

•J
r-
a
i-







































































































«V
tn!«t
M

HI



°


O


in
**

H



O


O



CJ, -t

rH






•U^
r-

10



in
N


i-4




O
in


(M






«t






r>
So

m






^
r'

^



fO
«4*


ro




(0
*


m






r»





o
o
cg'o rg «t o O
•N

fNJ

fO

ro



sO ON, CO LA O



h.


(NJ


ON



ON


ro


o
rH


r-


ro


f-


•4" h-


^



in tn *^ ; ro

•o
1
f- i>-

in



O



o



o


0


0


O
rH *H, (NJ (^





rfi


5



r-
ro







o
in

5



sj-
N


O 00




ro
"1


ON






P*




^
M


CO






+
N ro




O*




C-^










P1— CO
rO

0
fNj


|i«
N





: C^ (js; ^' ^
O ON O» CT> ON 0> O»
0


o



o


o


o


Q






O


0



o



o




o



o






o


































































3 O ' Q< O» ON^ ON ,£ Ji J, o
J 0 O! .*: ON
z, »m tsi
O O | II
v* M
1 1

1

0
m
1 •>
•H, o o, o o, o o1 ft o, N;
< j o! o o o b, a. pn: TJI
ami 01 o c* in o, \n
>i in o, in M, HI
q q (M HII M
* 1 I 1 II 1
'M Q
M
in ro o ml


m

0*




















































n
rH


rH


vO


1^
m

o
C\J





CO


m



N
N


CNJ
H



in
rH


CO






^
in






13
Ul!

en

N

N



iro in


N

«\J ph-|«M in
N rHlrH


in


fO


a>
fO

•o
N





rH


N



O
N


in




ON
(V


ON
rH





NO
*0






J
^


»


in


ao
fO

o



ON
J


CO





eo
M

P~
rH



in
N


mtin
0*



-o
rt/


f«
N





^
O
rH







rH



ro
m


o
PsJ





rH
NO







1—
UJ
Q






























































O| <1 < UU
•s. ai OQ Q.
r^1 i 	 n^ 1 1 1
tj r— — **•























































f-
UJ
T

UJ
?
o!r-
PPt

PO
rvj


rH


r»


rH
fN|

o m'o
«t tVJ

-«l-*



vO


ON


O»
*

ON
r^





fM


O



>O
rH


O
rH



^
ro


ON
H





N
NO






_l

in
N-





^»
*

1^



ON
(M


in




CO
Csi


fO
^»





^
m




(V!
Ul
(3
O 7



0


o


o

rH



O


o


0
PO m

m






o
«fr

*



o
CO


CO




o
.*O


ro






O
rH








•3 ?r "I

N






in

-------

1—
li

H— ~>j
O CO' t—
I
LUli 2
>' iU




1.
«r iij. u.! o
0.' 33
CO
DC
•^



U



£! -K'u.1
ajroj
£


^

*•
? co; t— !  ^J 1
*— ^
D
a.
u
a

•o

•a





o
•T

^.




,
O
— «











O
o
o

o
o
in

uu
^>
a


•o

— i
H




O*
m

r*.





ao
— (








O
0
o

o
o
«n
t
o
o
o
o
in
0*

p-
-o

^
*




en
en

o
tN




-H
^








o
9
o
•
o
in
r\
1
o
o
o
o
o
fH

o
ao

0>
o
— *




^J
{^

CO
ev




(*•
fT^
1-1







o
o
Q
•O
ao

r—
(M




•t


CO
en




m
•o
(N*







O
CO
co

f-i
1-1
m










0









o
O


O





O


o





o










o
0
•. »J » «J »
o
o
««4
1
































oim o in o
in

1
CM -4| •; o

i
in
ill *!



























z
o

(J
en
CO

_4
N




|«.
•-<

^
"*"




•N
•f
rv










Oil
QC

VJ1 ^
<— < uo
cj Oi o o! o! eNi ji^1 ^
O O O! O1 O Q.
0
C3
in


0
in
t\i


o
o
^


0
in



in at
j

















X
3
C
CO

•0
ao

P.
N




^»
-4

•T
fn




f<^
m
CM


















co
OI
3t
.








































































UJ
a.
>•
>-

>•
»-
»*i
CI
V
(X
^
OJ
*
«n
r*

oo
en
r-l




p.
e>J

o
m




ao
CO
•*















-1
^
ut
^
UJ
U


co

in

o
o

X

z
oc
u
u.
01
CO

0
r




co
*o
0*









J
M
^J
z

a

•1


^
x

•o
ao

en
«n
-0




sr
i«*

•o
•H




(7*
en
r*







cc
01
o

z

£
1
i
•^

co

r-

-------
      o
s
u

3

tc


I
                      UJ

                      X
                         •X)
                Z


                aJ
                   a
                   UJ
                   u.
                         3D
                   UJ
                      U
                   a.
                         a
                uU
                         a
                         2:
                UJ
                   u.
                   o
                      V)
                UJ
                   -•a
                      U)
                               CM
                               ro
                               tn
                               cu
                         o
                         >*•
                               -o
                               •o
                               (A
                               oj
                               U


                               -J
                               O

















0.

a
o

0
t— 4
r—
*>•
-j
a.
o
a
O

O

(M
-H
O

O

,0
fM
rH
O
tn

a

m
^
ro

rH
rH
m
*
00

^
~*
rH
U

o
r-
a
o
o
a
o
i
o
0
o
o
in
CM

in
tM
•n
a
~l
CM
Q
;M
^.

CJ
!•<•>
0
in
N
10
O
O
o
o
o
>r\
l

;j
O
O
O
rH

_,
AJ
-O


CM
--•3
•^
^
rH
'JO
-*
f\
N


X)
rH
rH


rH

-n
.•*>
(N

n
SI


0
r-
o
o
73
tn
^M
,
O
O
J
a
-H


o

o
o

o
o

o

a

o
o

o
o
0
o
o
o
rH
1
o
o
^
>f\



o

0
o

o


o

-J

a
o

CJ
o
o
o
o
m

1
o
o
s\
M



o

O
o

o
o

o

^

0
o

o
o



o
o
'„
'•\*

Ci
'U
rj
i£
•3

                                                                           m
                                                                           m
                                                                              TO
                                                                              »M
                                                                              J
                                                                                                    -0
                                                                                              :u

                                                                                              •X

                                                                                           QC
                                                                                           r»<-J
                                                                                           OQ
                                                                                                                 •M
                                                                                                                          O
                                                                                                                 'J
                                                                                                                       O
                                                                                                             CM
                                                                                                                    O
                                                                                                                       O
                                                                                                                          o
                                                                                                                 vM
                                                                                                                 O
                                                                                                                          U)
                                                                                                          UJ
                                                                                                          s:
o <

U- '

   I


at •
o :
u..
                                                                                                                       O
                                                                                                                          UJ
-O
—*
v


J

U
                                                                                                                           u
                                                                                                                          GC
                                                                 199

-------

»-
u
z

UJ
s ?
2 x
Q
? 23
f-
o
UJ
T
CD
u

^
UJ
LU
oo

u.
H Ol|a
. UJ
CO 
t/>
O -J
.- < uU
»—
u
UJ
•^
CO
o





- £ °j
UJ LU J
1 ^C* 1
•J 2. -—1
CO -3S. 9
< 0 Z3
*~ fE
>
z
UJ
U-
o

1—
{J
• ••
->
CQ
O
to
<
>-
\-
z
— ^
o
o
















>—
•-«
«*


**
jl
l/>
i



**

•
a
*
<

*«

| ca
«H
^ .
i— r n
5
t^

o
z
*l^
^»
cc
• — f
Z





^*




















3
2i
UJ
3£












































m
09



1
M
•H


00
IN




rg
•O
rH





V)
UJ
»•«
H-
2T
O






















Of
u

_J
_l
«*
•
_J
^
»-
u
»-

































a.
z>
r


r
CM







o
vr
CO


ro
-f

•o
— <


aj





—4
LO







O
rsj
O»


r»
in

CD



in





<>j
i>i»{»i^»i*iuj
Z3
a.
a
a
LW O' O; o! ini csi mi tv ca
>^ in; Ojinl rgj -J
mill



^
oe

u
rg
9»


«r
m

CO



r»





i^
rn













H-
rg
CO


«
tn

CO
x<4


au





^T
>»•









_l
»
>T

O



m





OT«
<












>—
•z
•4vi jj
X r
cr


o
m

s>



n





ft
in













o
CC
H-
LU
3C


U
£.






























































I—
•z
01
0
w»


«0
•T

O
•H


in





rH
m





CM
r»


CO
>*•

CO
rg


cr«
•^




r-
-o





EC.
O
H:
«-«
U«


O
•*

w»



•r





•T
•r







2^
h- 0
51*"^
_i — . <
^1 -y /y*
od — H
<^sc w
3M 0 —
0[<^
O
1—
aj a
ul a
X
Z K
rrl »M4
M 1
z
a
<
X
h-
l«
2
2
, :*
LJ
2
^
Z
O
200

-------





















^"
1
o
o
to
•— z
- i
III ^f
UJ < ,
CO |_ Z
< — 0
&•• ~^ jj
V) 2
C3 ^
z z
— UJ
u
z
03 Z
UJ
>- UL
fe *
T?^ 1 1
Q_ UL
>
^
Z




















ex
UJ
o
LU
U,


LU
H-
^
'Ht
H-



Ol
t—

>
H"l
oc
Q.



^J
2
z
-U
2C


U.
u

s
~)
cc
a













cc
LU
X
!•*
o

v~
£.
UJ
3C
Z
cc
UJ


O


or
i—
u
U

^
V
-iw

*.
3
03




a
a
CC
o




•^

•••4

l/l











CD


M

•
a
z
ca

<*

«
o
z
00

W

*
U
ca

w


c
z
ca


94

fl
a
z





CO





































































m
*$•


c\


O

a




^
*--

•*


^
,«

^



tr
m


~






oc
<\





t/!
UJ
*•"
^0
Z
U
_
<1
.
4


O

o





•o

M


O


C7




m


"*






tn









0
§
1
vn
o
o
o
0
in:
CM
i
09
fl


«n


o

a




o


o


m
r>

«\



CO
n


n






01









0
0
?
•3
01
o
o
o
o
-o


m


o

o




o
CM

*4


O



O

o




f^
^




CO


r-H




m


r-






cv
f»4













^
UJ
1









































































































or
»—
U"

i
^.
•T


^


O

0




fM
•^




V






m
CM












a
nr
H-
JJ
3;
m
m


V*H


0

0




CO
m

-*


o


o



p-
*o


CM






ro











a
CC
^_
UJ
z:
z
^





































































































t-
2
UJ
1
1
C

U
X
s
o
<}


m


0

o




o


o


,-,
*4*

fM



O



U






in





OL
O
1—
tV
\-
1
C
^,
O


f»
ro


r«-


o

O




^
•^

CM


^
«H

fM



r*
>T


^






o*
fH






a:
o
1-
h-
c


,_
^
O
m


CM


0

0




0
vn

f\


0


o



o
in


CM






^r












^
|
^.
^
201

-------













«/*
o
ce.
g
£

i
2
u
.•^
•3
Lu

O
<
Ul

eg «/>
«_ 32

j ^
CO
< to
•— UJ

_l
u

iZ
u.
0
Ul
0
z
J
OM ^^
z: o
o
*-* f*
^- Q
K Z
0















OC
Ul
r—

a
of
<


*
a
Zj

to
0
ce
<|u
•SlZ
h-



a.
£

0.
Ul
U.

CC
•M
4
UJ
t-
«^
1—
VI







o
z

























z
^


*•?

Zlo
*/>
l/>
a
Qt
a
i£
<


**
«ST|
4 [ •
H»;U
t/>

V)
o
ce
a
^{
t-
vo


V7
Ul
J
CO
o
a:
a

o
z

H-
ae
o
a.
UJ
or.
















j*

«t



*
O
«:

)
f-




m
f-4

f-4
f-4



eg
in

eg
*4J
»J"



-*
to
ao






to
Ul
f4
>-
u

J
J
•4

f»
1
— rf
^,
o
f-






















































































































a.
^3
O
o

z
o
rg


<





o
f-(











O
O
<-4
^J*


r*-




t-4
•>^

rs.



N
r-(

rg





en
rM


rg

in





^
r-i








r-
rg


•4-
•H



p.
eg

^>
f^


*1
(^

og
r*




_,
r\j

f-4
-4





m


CO


CO
f-4




ST
^t

O




GO
in

r>»
^g
•H



w
>»i
eg







O
C3 j ^2
o o
o o
o miolm
«•' *x\ rg ' 11-1
O 0 1 1 i |
**
f_
*

1
O O O O'O
in
*v
o
f\i


in
(T1



•O
rn

a?
•o
•^

0


0
rg




^
•^

m




,T,
in

T*
«^
og



o
sO
•T







O
O



o




o


0



o


o





o


o




o


o





0









o
o



o




o


o



0


o





0


0




o


o





o









0
o;o o
o.o
XV O
f\) —4
o
in


t 1
0 0
O



O




o


o



o


o





o


0




o


o





o












o
0
in
i i
O'eg,
0 O O'O O O O!
o o o;o o o:m ae
•^ UJ C3 ' C3 ^? u% 1?^ ! J\i r\i' r*}
a. >;>n'O'tn>rMi-4
o
a
a

tV

—i


'
L



z


;j






















































































































z
a

UJ
£

VJ
_,-
•r
IN eg




C7> OJ
rni *o



(N



t-4
r?\ ro

O
O


^
r-*

^
• M




00
<«l

cn




o
in

•r
V




02
CO
•—4













~4
CO


^


(^
w4




_,
r-4

03




^.
in

—4
sr
f>i



0
•O
eg









J
ae:
h-
I"*. 2T
1-4 ;/) 01
X  (^
o o
~z

z
































































CD' UJ !
I/)

3fj
























































Ul
o.
^,

^N
^_
f-«
u
m
eg


eg
>r



CD
rn

«n
•O


•T
**<4

n
rg




co
— <

"




rg
•**

<-4
p"»




O
f«»
f-4














J
t

f-4
in




o
-0

u
r*
eg



0
in
sr












eg


O
p»



0
«>

m
o*


jj


o
— i




^
_4

fO




>o
>T

—4
IN
«f4



f-4
-0
 j g»
<_>

to

1-4






















































































































Z
Ul
ac
z
Ul
;>
^
U

U.
<-*
X
rs»IO
eg


-O
^-



^


O
•O


M
1-4

^.
N




•O
f-4

tn




m
»n

—4
«-4
•4



i-«
f-4
eg









-J
u
Z
ID
a
VJ
•I
CC
eg


O
*M
9^


^
>n

rg
f-4
eg

CO


^
^*




eg
—i

r-




eg
.n

!*>
^|^JQ
r^


m




^
eg

in



O


0





ro
f-4

^



'
CO
in

^*
eg f-4
n



eg
eg
•O







£.;
Ul
0
Z
•5
Z
I




^.
eg












Z
O
1-4
_ Jl t/>
-4


eg




•o
eg

in



O


o





_
eg

*




ao
m

i-4
••4




CT
••»











Z

h-
'JJ
0*


f-4




O


O



o
pg

^,





0
eg

-*




o
•o

CO





in








Z
t-4
H-
01
iu
£

Z
2
uiiO
f^^-O X
rf ' ^r -t*"
AK ; *c- «~
oe •* u o
<—> X
u.

IJ

O

o
1—

^

0-
.^i
cc

?02

-------















CO
o
a
z

j—
CO
j
2§
LU
O
o
z
**
UJ
^
• • 1—
m co

^ X
Ul —
CQ
< CO
1— ui

p
^


fi
U-
Q
Ul
o
z
< u.
_J o
ft
S£ •
^^ rj
2*
g
z
^3
O
o













-J,
cu
K
«c
z

a
UJ
a.

OC
UJ
h»
X

u*
l/>



(2£
<— 1

o
U)
a.
a.
*••*
<•
UJ
>—

.
1^
CO







O
2£





























t/J
a
ec
4
a
z

Q
ac
2
z
^J
H-


t/0
a
ac

a
<(
H-

V»
a
ac
u
z

!••

1/1

-





































































































































Q.
3
O
OC
u

z
d
OS
m


o*




fM
in

(M
iH




cr
ro


0»



w
rO

r-






m


(T





^.
(M


04
o«



f-


o4
•-I




fO
«M4


«n



w
n

cr>





••n
m


07







fO
Oj











O

r.
•4




^



>»•



fM


O
i_l




-4-
in


m
fM






^O
^











o
o o
o o
01
04


m




o»
fM

0|
»4




O


m
fM






o4
^y











O
o



o




o


o





0



o



0


o





o



u







0












0
^^ ^3
o



o




o


o





o



o



0


o





o



o







o












o
o
o



u




o


o





0



o



o


o





0



t?







o












o
o
0



o




o


o





o



o



w


o





0



o







o












o
o
O O OlOiO
o



o




o


o





o



o



0


o





0



u







o















*j M *^ «M *i «4 «i
O: OI OI O in Q1 vn
o inio in KM r*t
J m fMi -•! 1
oi i (!) i
,

1
o
o
in
*•"*! C3 O C3 O1 CJ O1 O' t^ CM
t-Jtn
^
fV
r>uj
O O! O( Oi O Q O!
o oio o o o m fJt
o o o in o in: «M: Q
a, > in. o m M -^i i
2|u
fM
"* i



z
3


















































































































•














z
o

0
UJ
a:

JJ
*•«
I
a.
-D
rM


r-




rn
>T

m
1-1




a
*«<


fO



r.,
,— I

^.





0
in


m
i-4






O
ni

















^
*N


co




O
ro

CM
•-«




*O



fM



CO
—4

O





in
tn


CO
•"4






fO
rn













^
- Z
«aj<_>

o>
fM


fM
0«



0»
*^1

>0
f-(




tn
04


>o



<•
«M

O
f-t




^
m


•VJ
fM






-4





















rr i_! i_i i 	
^.
fM


|*»




03
fO

^
•^




r"4
O|


•O



^.
rT|

O
•H




-«
>»•


M
••4






O>
fM





















i 0, X 1C 5 1/7









































































































































CO
*-^
H-
^.^
CO


m


o
r<)



o
^

cr
n




^o
o<


-o



m
rM

~r
fM




CT>



03
•$•






r-
CT1




















0
*^
IX h>
04
•-4


^-




«
^n

m
•-<




ffl



•^



P.
-4

O





tn
^l


o»
^-^






O
fO

















O
ac
t—
UJ
X
^
CJ Q! Ul O) l^-1! >— UJ O
S)2
II1
|r|2C
z



































































































































f,^
z
UJ
X
z

UJ
^
o

a.
LJ
2.
rf
U/
U.
~(
rg


r»-




o
fn

0
•H




rO



^



in
•-t

m





^
o


o
fM






f*^
rn






CO
-4




co



ro



m
rM

(7»





•C



oo
04






Q\
ro








(- QJ
< O
a: 1-
CO ft^

Z CO
— _
Q^_
^^
rf" ^
**
H-

|
.&.
^
X
T"
--^
^ ^ 5:
**i-i ^^j 2

*
3
203

-------






















to
H
r-
to

X
1-

^

to
z
o
«
1—
<
UJ
a:
z
—
to
UJ
^
1-
—
0

CQ
O
U
t£.
UJ
g
0
0
z
UJ
to
CQ
O
ae
Q_























ID
3 o:
m C
-5 \j
ID C
C 3
— U-
o
>- 1- C
c 'i
ro x~a
4-« ro <
 UJ
I- 4J
3- 1

01
c — in
4-> ro -o
t> 4) L.

— c -a
M- = C
§ro
I- 4J
o o to
i in
a E
ro ro
i- en 01
« c o

o 'cxot
en
c
I- 4J
il
3 Q)
Z DC
1
a! 01
c
L. —
0) t}
.0 c
E 0
3 Q.
Z in







CD
^- "
*?

•
i


CQ
•*— '
e^»

•
o
z
CO
*— '
d^


•
Q
2

to"

£vp


.
o
z



,vl^
m
~~£


O
z


»••••>*
CQ
*—
**

.
z


OQ
fr?


jj
z
0?
^*>
*f
.
6
z

S

EC
"•*


,«s
s











CO
.^


oo
in


P^
CO


in

CM
^
CM



on
en


^.
CO



PO
PO
CM




-3-



-3"
m
CM



o
CM


^
in


CO



in
CM

CM

on

—

vO
VO

•^


in

*••



in
4-1
O
^
.
"ro
4-1
£
co o PO j- o~ioo
PO vO in «3" -31 -^


PO on in a\ — —
CM -3- onoo


PO co i — r- CM oo
PO CO J" CO PO CO


co in CM — o -3-
CM -3- VO -3"
•
— PO vo CM mco
— PO CO CM CM CM



— in r». in r---3-
— CM -3- O


CM r>-vO CM POOO
CM CM CM -3- PO CM



CM J" CM r-% CM vO
	 3- VD O





CM PO-3" O CM •*
CM CO PO-3" PO CO


CM mvo in r»
— -3- in CM
*~



CM co o^ on on ^™
CM CM — — — CM


CM co o~\ — m —
CM POOO


— O 00 VO OOO
— -* CM PO PO CO



— vo co o m CM
— j- in J-
^™
coo — o o on
CO CM CM CM CM —

PO PO O CM O •—
— CM -3- r—


^3 CO P^» O^ NO CO
onoo r>- r^vo vO
on m r^ CM vo r^
— -3- — oo r~
— — CO


OOO — CM CM CM
— — VO -3" OO O
— CM vO





a o o o o o
3 0 0 0 O O
o o o o o o
 o o o m o
Q. > in o m CM —
o o CM —
Ow
in — -3- CM
m in -3- -3-


on co CM a^
oo o oo r-»


co vo PO —
PO PO PO -3°


— in CM r~


en in co co
CO CM CM CM



CM CM CM CO
vo m~r -3-


tf\ ^O SiO ^0
CM ro CM r^



o r->. &\ r*+
-3-1 	 ^ vO





o CM r*^ \o
ff\ t+\ t*\ r*\


cnco a>oo
-* \o \o vo




\O fO T"^ ^O
CM CM — —


CM 00 — O
-31 •* PO CO


UAOO — CO
CO CO CO CO



VO — OO CM
moo mvo

on— CM -3-
— CM CM CM

O -3- O LA
CO -^ -3* -^


4- moo CM
VO vO VO ^^
— — VO OO
VO — 00 OO
— CM — —


CM r^-31 CM
m CM P-.VO
CM PO CM CM




c
o
'o> —
4) (Q
Of L.
4-1
U 4-1 C
— in V
J= ro o
a. «)
 L. u 3 in
Jiz<8:S
CM VO CO
m-3- -3-


f^. •— O



— oo —
-3" PO ro


— CM CM
vo -31 r^*
^"~
— vo in
PO CM CM



in r— r-.



— j- vo
CO CO CM



vo rx o
•3- CM vo
^-




-3- CO h-
CO CO CM


O CM CM
m-3- vo




vo cnco
CM — —


OO — CM
co r-- .3-


— oo —
CO CO CO



m o CM
-3- -3- !•».
*""
PO — —
CM CM CM

-3- VO O->



m CM o
^^ ^O ^^
r-- o on
•3- r^ CM
— CO CM


in CM oo
on cr\ CM
— in co





1
c
>- u
4J c -a
— — ro c
u ro -fl i)
24J 3 0)
c .a -a
4J a) 3 c
a> o to —
co -3- —
m -3- m


co -3- —
O POCM
<— CM


co r~on
CO POCM


r-.vo CM
vO CO —
"
co r^ —
CM CM-3-



— — r-
-3- -3- —
^

OO PO J-
CM POCM



on -3- o
-3- r-~—
-w




onvo i^-
CM POCM


— CM —
in on—
—



— onon
CM —CM


CO —CM
CO O —


— VOCM
PO COCO



^3* O PO
m cr>—
*~
•— cMin
CM CM —

r>-vovo
CO —
rmm

CO O\—
vO vOvO
r^to —
r^ CM ^f
— m


ononr>.
CM r-»




4-1
C
E 0)
E- g1
ai u c
> c ro
O 3 £
U) O 1
CJ —
14_ | ._
O u u L.
E >• § f
i- ra o 4J
O £ u O
u.
204

-------
                  ro
                  3  .
                  a-  c
                  0) .-
                  -o -a
                  ro  c
                  c
               oo
               -a-
PA r~ LTV CM -a- —
PA\O  LA-3- -3" LA
                         PA O VO  I— CM PA
                            — CM  -3" OO CT\
                         r-~vo co o
                         co  — oo r-~
                   CM PA LA
                   LA-3- LA
                   r^ en LA
                   r^~ LA CM
                                                                                     -a- -a- cr\
                                                                                     \O-3-PA
                                                                                     PA CM \D
                                                                                     — PA —
                                                                                     — CM
O
z
LU
O
DC
LU
a
                  O  C
               C Q.  E
               ro    -o
 u)  
T3 -C —i
 10  O  Ul
 c  (D  in
— I- <
                                           LA IA PA CA-3-
                                                                                                   PA	3-
                                                                                                   -3" J-  PA
                              vO
                              o
                              PA
                              LA
                              LA
                         vO OO 1^ CM
                               CM J- \O LA
O O \O — CT> —
   -3" CM CM — CM
O vO  CM  PA\D OO
       —  CM
                         OO •— OO 
.
o
Z


x— *

*•-» *
d*?


O



^
 ID  C
 a LU
 L-
 c  
                                        .— r~ — CM CM —
                                        — CM CM — •— •—
                                                  -a-  cr> LA —
                                                  CM  CM PA PA
                         co  CM vo on
                         PA VO VO LA
                         r~. r-. — -a-
                         CM  CM PA CM
                                                  PA OO I—• VO
                                                  -a- LA LA-3"
                                                                 — PAvO OT\
                                            — cr\ —
                                            PA CM PA
                   LA CT> —
                   -3- O l-»
                   CA CT\ PA
                   CM CM CM
                                            CM CTv PA
                                            -a- o  LA
                                   LA CM -3"
                                   CM PA CM
                                                                                     LA O O
                                                                                     -3- r-~ —
                                                                                     oo oo r*^
                                                                                     CM CM —
                                   o
                                   LA-3-
— J-  O PA CM —
       — — CM -a-
                         •—  CM CM —
                   o o —
                   CM -9- PA
o
u
o
en
a.
 O)
 c
•- —  U)
 4J  ID "D
 O  V
—  i-
—  c -o
M- 3  C
 c     ro
 O  1-
o o
               ID
                     ro
—     u
 i-  o> a
  .-  L.
O  O.Q-
                              o
                              PA
                              CM
                              CM
                              CM
                              CM


                              VO
                         o    ^o
                        z    —
   o vo eo f-o
   \O PA CM CM PA
          — — PA
       •— PA LA •—
                                        CM PA \o CM r-- -a-
                                        CM CA CM CM •— CM
                                        CM LA CM LA CM O
                                              — CM PA O\
    _     PA
CM  PA PA CM
oo  r— PA -a-
PA  r-\o -a-
                                                  cr> cr> i—a-
                                                  •- — CM CM
                                                  O O  O VO
                                                  PA J-  LA-3-
                                                                     -* vO CM
                                                                     PA CM PA
                                                                     o co -a-
                                                                     UA 
0 0
a.
o o
0 0
o o
§0
LA
LA CM
O O
O O
0 0
0 O
LA o
CM —
O O
§§
o o
O LA
1 1
0 0
O O
0 0
o LA
LA CM
o
o
o
CM
1
O
o
o
o
c
o
O)
a:
U 4->
— in
jz ro
a. o
ro -c
en L.
0 0
0) Z
U)
_
ro
L.
4-*

o o
                                                               205

-------








































VO

,__

LU
CD

h-











































































to
h~
a:

2
a.

o
o



u

^_
OL
 O vO in
4J 4) 4-> O 	 • —
O — CD O
I— XI 4-1 • O
O CO TJ 	 	
1- 4)
0- Lu
<-— "*"
4J |— LA l«5
C O v-'
W 1
— U I/I
34) —
> 0
E o u
4) O — •
XI —
O CD
Q- 4) _i -a-
TJ Z --'
Q> O
Lu
CM
_l —
4_1 ^ ^**.
C 1— CO •
x: 4) o^-  *"
4) o
"jO
O <0 >•
\— 4-* 1 ^— x
D_ CD Z CM
4-> O *-*
to



-C 1 1
4-> TJ C
— 4) u
3 Lu 4)
E CO 0 ^='
4) CJ ^
— 4) in

O CO CO C
v 4J !• fl)
O_ to 4) £











E
4)

Xt
o
u
o.

















•i:




z



•ic
e-?


z




-X
*e



z

•i:




z



-i:





Z




&




z






0
-a-


00
-a-
-3-


CM


_
vO
CO



CO



0


CM
CO


CO

CO


oo




p^.
oo




-a-
CM



_
^.
CM










4)
4-1
10

o~
4)
TJ
CO
C
^

1

m
c

'o
c
CO
c
• —
Lu




LA
CO


OO
CO
CO


f^.
CM

VO
0
CO



o
•—


CO
*"•

LA
CM


LA
p*^
CM


r»»




CM
oo




r-.



CO
cn
^_



^
>*
4_)
c
•—
CO
4_>
U.
41
O
C
~"i

1

C
o
•—
4-1
CD
u.
1 i
(/I >^
— aj
c —
•^ Q)
E o
TJ
^




CM
CO


vO
LA
CO


0
CM

CM
CM
CM



tr\



cr\
cn

CO
CM


r^.
LA
CM


CM
r—



-a-
CO




—



CO
CM
r^






1_
O

Ol
c
• ~
4->
u

•—
<4-
c
o
0 0
•—
1 4->
in
in •—
TJ •—
u co
CO 4)
TJ U,
C C
CD 3
4-1
to




r^*.
CM


.3-
o
CO


0
CM

LA
CM
CM



vO



^-
l^

_
CM


CO
co
CM


1 —




tTV
•*•




^



-a-
LA
r—






4)
4-1
CD
3
^y
0)
TJ
CD
C
^

1

C
O

4-1
CO
U

C.
3
£
£=
O
u




r-.
CM


r*^
cn
CM


CO


^
0
CM



-a-



CO
-a-

CO
CM


-a-
in
CM


oo




co
cn




-a-



^~
VO
1—






4)
4-1
CO

0-
4) C
TJ O
CO —
C 4-J
— CD
Q.

0
CD —
C 4-J
•— L-
-si CD
CO O-
•%.

>• CD
O 0
— o

"o
Q_




r—
CM


00
CO
CM


-3"
^

LA
LA
*—



CO



cn
CO

oo
w—


cn
cn
•—


i —




CO
CO




o



vO
*—
1—



1
4)
TJ
CO
C.
w

1

4)
U
C
CD
4-1
in
•_
in
(/)
<£

*—
CD
U 4>
— 4-1
C (0
XT 3
o D-
4)
1-




cn r**
f,— ^_


— CM
— cn
CM —


LA OO
,—

vO •— •
vo cn




LA -a-



CM —
LA -a-

-a- -a-
r— ^~


cn —
LA in
— —


-a- cn




LA —
-a- o




o -a-



-a- o
— LA
^~






1
C
~^

O) I
C
•— in
Q. 4)
O- 1-
CO 3
— in
I- CO
4) 4)
> Z
O *- i-

Q_ LU




































_^
LA
_
•—
II
Z
V—n*

in
c
4)
TJ
C
1
4)
1_

n_
o

L.
0)
1
C

«—
CO
4-1
O
4-1

C
O

TJ
4)
in
CO
XI

in
4)
D)
to
4-1
c
4)
U
i_
4)
CL
•K
206

-------









































r^»

UJ
_j
CO
<
r™

















































irt
UJ
i_
<
v>


1 —
5

t/4*
z
0
—
r~
<
_l
UJ
01

z
~
to
1(1

t—
z
ra
o
u
x^.
CD
0
UJ
en

I—
z
Q

LJ
-y

Ul
to
^
Ul
—1
m
0
0£
Q.










ID
3 0
CT C
Ol —
TJ T)
ID C
C 3
— U.
>• O
4-1 L. C
CO-'—
ID E
4J >«, "O
i- - <
01 0)
U o E
c v-
•=>  o
01 0
4-1 — (.
ID ID C
3 o n
CT— 4-
t> C V
•o j: -
ID O (/
C 01 V
— 1- <
0)
ID 1

a* c c
01 3 O
-o E —
ID c 4-1
con
— o o
< vO

*<•



O OO
Z -3-

< -3"
* — CO,
^^


O vO
Z CO

< oo
•*" CM
d<



o on
Z CM

< -3"
— ' PO
d«


d \o
Z PO

01 ID ^
4-1 Q. ID
ra o ¥.
3 4-1 1
cr L. i —
0) 0- O
"O Q.
ID L>
c o c
— 1 h-
_Q a) L.
n u 3
C L. U)
O O ID
U) 14- 01
ID C 3C
o) ui
L- 4-1
C 0) C
3 >— £
0)
c
— •— in
4-1 ID -0
O 0) L.
— t. ID
— C TJ
M- =} C
C ID
O L. 4-J
CJ O OO


< -a-
•-- CO
**?


O VD
Z PO

^ ^
< oo
*e


o' or>
z • —


< PO
•** PO
**



O LA
Z PO

i in
o. E
ID ID
11 en o>
0) C O
> .- u
a: LA
— CM
N1


O VO
O 0.0. tZ CM
CT1
c
U 4-1
0) L.
-Q O
E Q.
3 0)


-- LA
« O



o p** co in
in-3- -* -3-




— OO LA-3-


LA POvO SO
-3- LA CM CM



O  on
CM

r-«. on
CM CM




o on
CM

vr> on
CO CM



r-. on
CM



O LA
CO -3-



CM -3-
CM •—


O CO
CM —


LA -3-
"™


•a- CM
CO CO




LA O
CM i —

-3- VO
CM CM


oo oo
*~~


•f —
t~~- PO



VO CO CO
ro in PO




o on o
— CM

on o o
CM -3" CO



oo o oo
CM

CM VO VO
CO CM CM




on co i-»
^

on vo vo
PO PO CM



— oo i-~
~- •—



vD OO vD
CO CO CM



o on r-
*~ *~~


-3- CM LA
— CM •—


-3" • 	 3-
r~


CM CM on
CO -3" —




on — LA
CM

— -3" —
CM PO . —


vo r— PO
•~


OO O Is-.
CM IA CM



Ul
0)
4-1
c
o
o
<
"
ID
4-1
,0
1—
Q.
3
O
L. O
U) O
o
c •
O 0
— o
4-1 m
n
•— i_
3 Ol
D. >
O O
0.
0 O
0 0
o o
o o
O LA
LA CM
1 1
O O
O O
O O
O O
LA O
CM —

O
O
O
cT
O
1
O
O
O
O
LA

C
O
O)
0)
of
U 4-1
— in
-C ID
0. 
-------








































CO
"~~
UJ
_J
OO
<^l
1-







































































co
UJ
3
z
UJ
C3

c£
IV
UJ
Q
UJ
LL.

1—
3

CO
z
0

1—

-J
UJ
Z


CO
LU
~-
1—
;g
O
CJ
-_
CO

a
UJ
O£
LU
1—
Z
^3
o
o
z
LU

CO
z:
LU
	 1
CD
O
oe
Q_



























a)
4->
ro
3 D
CT C
ID C
C 3
	 li
>• O
4-1 L- C
C Q. —
ID E

1 	 <
 a. o
"U CL.
ro o
c o c

-Q D 1-
ro u 3
c L- «
O O ID
in M- ID
ro c z:
 ro ~o
O (U «-
— L. ro
— C TJ
«- O C
c ro
O L. 4-1
o o co



i in
a. E
ID ro
. — L_
L- cn 01
(U c o
> — L.
O Q-Q-


CT
C.
»- 4-"
0> 1-
-Q O
E a
3 1
-z. a:





















6

,— x

~—*



•
O
Z

r—^
^
- — '
(3^9


o
z


3
— ^
d*9



O

— »
^
*~s
£**?



O
Z

, 	 s

—
<5*P


6
z:


•— v
^
• — •
6s?



O
Z


^— X
^
«•— s
<3NP



O
Z





-^
^:






















LA

-=r
Lf\



\f\




r*~"
CA



\D
CM


p-^
CM



O
^~



CM



CM




-3"
CA



, —
.—


CM
f-f




LA
CM



VO
CM



CA
CM




_^j-
CM





LA
O




in
(U

4_j
c
3
O
o

, —
,^
^

•*
"io

O
1-
CT\I 	 CO
LA-3" LA -3-

PAOO OO LA



CT\ CA CA O^
LA LA CM —



CA O OO vO
1 — ' —



CM OO O CM
CA • — CM CA


r-~ CA i — o
._



LA — -3- CM
-3- -3- CA -3-



O r^ CM CA



\£> CA CA CM
CA CM CM -3"



CO LACO CA
1 —



CA \O "- \O
CM —


LA •— -3- CM





CA O"\ CA CA
CM CM CM —



LA LA O VO
i —



• — CT\ I — . CA
-3" CM — —




CA LAVS -3-






CM l-~ LA —
CM ' — CA CA







CL O O O
3 O 0 O
O O O 0
1_ ^3 *.*.*,
0 O O O O
0 O LA 0
C -LA CM •—
O O 1 1 1
— O O O 0
4-> LA O O O
ro o o o
3 rj O O O
O. > LA O LA
O 0 CM —
Cu
CO -3" CM CM
LA -3- LA LA

-3- CM LTV CA



O CM LAvD
LA CM CA CA



CM %J3 O CA
' — ' —



OO CA-3- -3"
CA . — CM CM


CA LA r^\O




O CM OO O
LA LA CA CM



CM -3- — LA



co r^ co co
CA CA CM CM



CA O 00 f^




CA f~- — -3-
— CM


CA CM \O —





O1 O 1 	 3-
CM CA • — CM



r — . co LA vo




CAsD -3- CM
CM r«l CM • —




^^ ^^ ^« CA






-3- r~ cr\ LA
CM CM CM CM






C
o

cn —

-c ro o
a. D
ro _c _c jz
cn L. i_ 3 in
O O O O u
V z z co 3
us
LA CM
LA-3-

• — CA



LA CA




CA-3-
CA



-3" CA
CM CM


00 CA




CM LA
-3" CA



— —



o 
CA CA



CM CM
CM —



LA CA
w—


. — , —
f—




vD CA
CM CM



CT\ t~-
f



OO O
CM —




• — CA
CM





-3" —
r^ CA











in
3
t-> 0
ro L.

co o>
O ZI
Ot
*—
1- 4-J C
4J  -o c
O ff ._
C3 g
4-1 -O C
X- 3 < 5
j£ _C C
E 4-> 4-1 ^
1_ .- .- c
0 3 3 =>
Lu
208

-------
D2     O
<     DC
                 'LI
                 O

                 1UI.J
                 1/10
                 C2 U
                                                                  00

-------




























in
UJ
fc
31
0
u

z
~~ '
z
|*j
UJ
o

5
_j
0 <
111
UJ £
CO O
< a:
t~" ~
Z
UJ
o
1-
u>
UJ
_i
i
0

0
£






























u.
u
-v
UJ
<->

i:j
t/>
ro
•
a.
<3
/)
I/)
_y
_J
JJ
^

z
a
a
1/1
u


u.
O
z
a
a.
u.
'-3
jj
^*
T
^3
-3

J
5
rH



53
^
*j
5

_j
i—

"1
C
~
h-
isL

'_j
«-<
0
a.


,-
^
-
<
z
uj



















sc
UJ
X
J

J,,
O
JJ
^
Q

X
O
UJ
*•"
vj
rH
2
•J
;£


i
^
X
0
u
J.
OJ
-J


CO
JJ
u
z

z
u.

UJ
i/)
£
u
a.
X

N/)
a
o
^

j)
<
OJ
z.

X
J
a.
a.
5
Z
u
h-
<
•^;
O
J.
0
rH
t—
a
a:
-












•*

*
t
z.




•
O
Z
^



































































































^

2



rg
OJ


in
-o




•^
'M


^




^r
••O

CJ


^
•O


r—
O
•H



-0
CM
O
^t



s\
^g

ON
•f)


-H

y^
r\j


TO
^'

-u


o
iO
™*


^
Z

c
L.

^

.^
T
h-
'™
1-






























































































































































a.
-
'X
u
.fc
c
5
-»
—
u.
'->
X
N

«>



00
Q

'*


vQ
O


"*1
i15)




-O
^
^.
•H



-3
N

O
•H


r^|

r-



"M
-T
t-l
C\


3
LT\




O
^
«.

r
I
':

j

—4

-^

•O



p-
rg


j>
P-4




-O
•H


u^




^J
in

n


o
r»


r>J
•T




-T\
in
j«
— t



OD
•H

O
r-^




iTi
1-1


W1
N
•O



.n
u^




0
^
,,
~)
^
1
0

-J
'^"


0

•-}



o



u





0



o




a





o



o





o

0




D


o



o

a



o

,_,



o





0
,^
^
~
ft
1
o

irv
r\


O

o



o



o





a



o




0





^



0





0

o




^3


3



O

o



o

0



TJ





O
'\
^
^
tsi
1
^

\J
r«


O

o



o



J





o



o




o





o



o





o

-,




o


3



0

a



0

o



o





-1
r'
f,
o
— I
1
c;

x\



O

J



O



IJ





^J



u




JJ





0



o





o

o




3


o



o

•3



O

O



0





•3
^j
••
J1

1
0

»
M



0

O



o



l_>





o



o




u





Q



o





^

0




o


3



o

0



o

_,












-:
'^
•l
f\

1
r_J
•>
j;































































































































































i
^.
IL
X

X
a.
£.
tj
^,
.JJ
U
0

"0



•o



3)





•o
oa


if




U
CQ

•N


-0



•o
!M




•r>
M
TJ




rH
f*>

^
^


rn
•M

03



O
•r
-T
^


in
(T»









'£
c
^—
u
~
£

J>

*



CT*
rH


tu





-0
rH


P"




p.
•O

tsl


a
•*


o
i^l




^
N
0
rH



Q">
rH

r,



rH

39



ITS
•n
in
~<


"i
-r






*^
_£
t-
,"5
c
—
X
f_
2:

n

t*.



»o
'N


^g
,— 1




CJ
-^


CP




0
J^

rsj


f\J
r*-


m
m




LT\
^
-0
l-<



»t
f*y

^,
r^J


• \

a*



"0
^

i>


^
*T










X
i—
~
_.
j

•*

^t



nJ
CM


r*-





rH
ni


o
t-t



m
-o

-sj


•0
O


rH
rsl




o>
"^
NO




00
isj

o



rH

-t



30
M
3<



"\
m











-—
t/i
u
X



































































































































































-
V
h-
j.
•>
•^
u.

>_
f
^J
X
•N

O



CO
•H


tn





^
r>j


tNJ
•»*



CP
J\

(M


—»
*O


0





^3
i— 1
l>




O
r»4

tO



O
ry

<*•>
rH


'J11
n
y.
-H


U»
•T



flC
O
I-
<]
oc
5
—
*
4

L"
_^
H-
1— t
X

^

-0



^
CM


*O
r4




^
"^


*>




(J
••

^


CO
V0


lf\
•4"




!*•
N
=0
rH



(7\
CNJ

IT*
-H


^
rH

O
"*


••Q
n
^.
l SI


O
O




°
Q
|-
t/1
2
C
<
,L
i_
-M
£

r»

O



%^
iM


O
—1




!>•
I»H


r*




rH
*o

"sJ


•^J
"•


'\J
fO




>">J
rn
,0
-H



J*
->l

N
— <


•-M

•J*



rH
•or
r-
r-<


^
-^









^
£
J
•i
jS^
"3

210

-------







,-
CM
"~

(U

J3
ID
I—










CITY MANAGEMENT STAFF
gy.
o
IL.

O
II 1
Q
LU
LU
Z
fn
z

•yr.

cc

Q
LU
^^
§
LU
CC
|—
z
LU
4-1
C
0)

C;
O

>
c
LU

1
C
ID

CO

>
C
LU

_
ID

C

O
TJ
"o
CO
TJ
_1


4_l
O
(D
Q.
E


1
C
LU

u5

1_
ID


C
O
V.
>
c
LU
U


(
O




+J
c

E
U
u
O
<4-




^
•^

o
z




•M
c
 LA
LA — OO CO
CM CM CM r—
CM CO — O
LAvO l~^ CO
vo co r^. o
LA LA LAvO


vO LAvO O
— LA co-a-
r—  r— r—*





-a- oo — —
r^vo r^ r»
CM cnoo r^
LA cnvo vo
^ **- •— ^~

r^ co o r^
vo r*^ r^ vo

oo -a- vo vo
CO •— vO LA
— CM — —
co
CM
o
-a-
cn
CM
LA
CM
-a-
-a-
vo


CO
^~
•«•





cn
vO

CM
^~

oo
vo

LAOO
r~ —
r— LA
CM co
cnvo
COOO
cn i-^
— CM
oo -a-
-a- vo
LA LA


en LA
r^ LA
CM —





«— f—
r^ r-^
vo en
vo en
CO f—

en —
vo r^

cnco r~

*—
LA en
co —
O vO CM CM O
CM — CO CM
vo o co -a- o
-a- —
-a- vo oo -a- -a-
co CM -a1 -a- —
oo r~» CM oo —
LA o vo -a- -a-
CM CM co-a- —
oo o cnoo • —
en cnco -a- vo
-a- LA -a~ -a- oo


-a- r--. CM oo vo
— o —
• — a-





OO CM CM vO f-»
VO f>~ Is- LA LA
r-~ i^oo o -a-
LA cn — —
— -a-

LA— OO O —
vo r^» oo LA r*^«

— r-. CM en LA
LAOO CM
— •a-
li.

O
 0  O •- -ol
"§  D. ID  01

i ££®
CM
I—
cn
   vo -a- co-a-
— LAco-a- —
     — CM LA
vo -a- oo -a-
o cn co co
CM CM CM CM
vo r^ cn
r>- — r^
— LA CM
CM O LAOO
co cn CM —
CM VO
Q.
>•
in
4-J
<_>
<
•t
ro
4-J
£
Q. O O O O O
3 O O O O O
o o o o o o
13 O O O O O LA
O O LA O LA CM
C • LA CM —
O O 1 1 1 1 I
— O O O O O O
4-> LA O O O O O
ID O O O O O
3 a) o o o LA o
Q. > LA O LA CM —
O O CM —
0.
c
o
01
0)
<£
.c
Q.
ID
<0
CJ

4->
in
ID
0)
4-*
1_
o

+J
c.
>
4-J
u
o
1_
4->
(U

c
— ID
ID -Q
1_ U
4-1 3
C J3
(1) 3
o 

:pendent
*v
C
•nment
i_
0)
>
o
M-
o
e
o
L-
l_
— Ol
o c
C ID
Sf
CJ — •
O C
>» 3
(D O

C
o
in
u>
O
O
O)
c
4-1
0)
01 o)
c 2:
4-1 C
0 3
0) O
cr •
3 a.
O 
-------
CM
\NAGEMENT STAFF
•^«»»
>-
r™
O
o
^

lj_

o
« [ 1
^^
UJ
UJ
z

2



"T
5
L
^
Q
UJ
<
i^j
UJ
1
^y
LU
^
O
_
=>
Z
LU
i.
UB
O
CO
LU
O.
^















u
 Q. (0
C E -w
LU — CO


^
t

**
o
z

C C
(0 LU 4-1
4J C
CO l*S &)
E
u in a)
•— ^o o
> L. U
C 03 O
LU T3 U-



•—^
^
^w*
8*

o
z

_ {-
ID O
U !_
C '> C
tu c 
C O1
— c
4) u c
J3 O — -0
E a. 03 
3 
z oc t- z
^.^
^
— •
**
o
z




x*^
 O O O
Q. > LA O LA
O O CM ~
Q_
CM on NO on
PA CM -3" CM
o — oo on
LA LA-3- CM
NO •— oo on
— CM —
CM O — PA
PA-3- PA CM
O LA CM |-~
. — • — • —




LA PA On CM
LA LA LA LA

r — o PA NO
— CM CM —





CM O -3" —
LA LA I^NO


NO on on on
— .— CM —


-3- OO -3" —


PA NO on on
CM CM CM —




— oo on —
PA PA PA PA




c
o

CD —
0) ID
O£ L-
4-1
O 4-1 C
— I/) 0)
_c ID o
O. 0)
m -c J= -c
!•• ^J 4-J +J ^J
Di u u 3 m
O O O O  Z Z co 3
CJ
1 — O OO PA PA
PA PA PA PA PA
LA PA LA O PA
PA — — CM •—
LAOO CM O O
j- -3- NO -a- -a-
PA — -a- -a- NO
-3" CM CM CM —
PA O OO O OO
PA PA PA PA CM
•—PA LAOO —
pr\ .— _ _ ^_




On LA — l~~ LA
LA-3" LA LA LA

NO O O -3" CM
LA CM CM PA CM





PA CM -3- LAOO
NO LA LAND LA


o PA ^ on CA
NO CM CM PA CM


NO r"» o CM PA
NO r**- oo NO i^

PA-* •— t~v on
NO PA PA PA CM




LA -a- on o o
on-* CANO -a-

L.
O
1 1
4-J L. O
C 4-1 4-1
0) in nj
E — L.
C C 4J
l_ .— ift
l/l (!) E —
3 > -a c
4-1 0 0 < —
(0 L. O £
4-1 4-1 4-1 -O C
CO 0) H- 3  _y
4J 0) O l_ — .- C

Z Lu.
                                        212

-------
CM   U.
•—   U.

u.   t?
-I   V)
m

f   t
     b.
     o









V
se.
>jj
<
X



o

_l
o
I/)





















^
r- 1
»
V
rH
_J
J
3



JJ
_
I/)
•
_J
^.
3
J


I/)
!jj
•-)
H£
UJ
rH
U
1/5
Z
UJ
a:
u

<
z
<
3:
CJ
z
)•*
1—
i
a.
Ol
"u
















f-

-H
tN
ID

•O
'O


HI


rH
IN
0
IN
IN


70
*^
r*t
-33


^O

^0
— 1


•-H
— *


?-
"4
•~ (

•O
HI
«>-

'JJ
—*
1—
«)

_J
-I
<4.

*
— J

J

_,
.H


N



^Q


«



tr
CO

o



^
lj\


|^
r-4



!>.




TN
P*
t— i



r-»
•O
~-4
rH



y,
-n


r-




•o






=0
iH




o
T
0
-•)
J
uTl
I

O

o
'O
'N

s>



-r


CO
UK


*"



in
CO

rH
m


CO
CO


Tl
n

o

CO
rH



»
ifl
m



0
*
N



*\
^


•f
rH



nl
(M





O
^3




^
J
O
3
r\
N
1
71
-J
J
_,
6
"4

^



f^


'O
r^.


UO
-H


•3
•a

o
rH
rH

•O
O


tu
••*

"ft

-0
-r



v
CJ
"T
*-4


h.

-n



r-
—i


f*)
"0




u\





•X)
m
rH



3
o
,3
"J
o
rH
1

^ j
J
-j
LA


O



n
-*

»N



tN
_!


y,
r*

0
rH
IN

^
CO


tn
rH

IN

03
J\



a
^N
<*>
IN


•N
•I
ro



^
i-H


O
m



^
SJ





*O
-o
t\J



^3
0
0
•J
J-*

1
•1
• J
o
^
fN


t



^
M

•O



•o
•T


f
**•

-r
•N
•T

^
JO


•H
'O

•a

•*•
a



p*
J




o






o





•3
o
^
r,


1
j
1 3
a"\
,g



0



-3


o



o



0


o



rj



^J


o

o





(J




o
•3




o



o




CJ






o








J
0
-^
».
r\j

JL
JJ
— .
5

























































































































/
































z
•3
wrt
J
[^

'•^J
l—t
JL.
a

o
tD
'jj
o
^



p««»


^
^


IN
rH






^
^O
Is"
rH


•o

>}•



^T
•H


-si
-n




m





"SJ
r>j
'M








V-"
'-O
*1
.JJ
.»-
T
j
*£

0



'T*
-•*

CO



"O



^,
03

•t)
-T
CSJ

>O
cu


•—I
sO

o
CN
»H
^O



*>
N.
-r
%J


T.
I
.a



^



%X)
CNJ




•4>





•^
•")
fl





-J
.*

^•J
jj
j

"J_
K
U
-^L

t



O
•H

W
sT1


*"
N


NJ
^

*H
^T"
•N

^
fi


'N
-n


rH
'J*
•o



'O
^
-H
N


-o

•4"



• J
•H


i)
N




-u





~n
^y
r\j












-U
o
-J
J)

0



n
•i

UO
-0


"1
_l


m
•o

IT*
U>
r-(

^
r^


>^
u>


"
n
Ty



^
r~
ro
^N


•X-

N



pg
«4


rH
n



o
[/»





«n
n
^N













LO
UJ
•5




























































































































































LJJ
a.
_

>•
P.
^^
u

,^
w
u
s:
n



u>


o>
CO


•^
^


•a
'a

(j*
-a
-H

(N
U*


»
CM

JO
r*


•»
^M


CM
TO
"M
rH


a>


J>
(^
IN

tj)
71


U
J>


""
•H]

^j
^3

u.
LJ
at

(_t
u.
/t



N
-*

*>
**


0
-H


*
r**

•^
j>
•H

CO
U3


in
tN

•-o
rH
P*-
<)•



V
m
[j,
rH


N
O




-H
H


u*
CM




u>





yn
-f>
i^





_1
j
--^
~i5
o
^
•i

rj
-T,
3L

A



-^
"^

1^
*»


'T
*U



3>
f*"

"0
CO
n

Ul
TO


M



^T
;M


-H
-*•




>•
CJ
^sl



-,.





•u



^M











0
M








-.
1
— H
/)
t/>
"t!
"~
•-j
^_j

o



3


^
•O


N



-n
OJ

vf>
•H


OJ



sr
•H


rH
ro




r*~
^
•H



M





•xj
• M


^




-T






-0
H


rH


O
LA


•J-



in
i"*

•0



UU
a


^



"
rH




f**
•o




m





in
CM


'M



'JJ







U3




'2
i— •
H-
JJ
.-

ii
c

,_„

o.
-U
',/;

                                                  213

-------

-------
<    Ul

P    W)
     cc
     Ui

     fe
     o
     a:

     >
     o
                              ON
                              5
                                             215

-------
     iii
     X
>
,£
    I LL
    ' J.
    i n
      a.
      _LJ
      x
                     •o

                     -r
                           -rj.M

                           rvj j\
                            I  I
                           ~>! --*
                           -jj-
                                      o
                                      CJ
                                                                                   .n
                                                                                   ro
                                                                              is;
                                      216

-------
                           APPENDIX  3


              RECIPIENTS OF FEDERAL PART OF SURVEY*


Advisory Council on Historic'Preservation

Department of Agriculture

Atomic Energy Commission; regulatory and nonregulatory

Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers

Department of Commerce

Department of Defense

Council on Environmental Quality (Chairman)

Environmental Protection Agency (11); regional offices

Federal Power Commission

General Services Administration

Department of Health, Education and Welfare

Department of Housing and Urban Development (11); regional offices

Department of Interior  (13); bureaus

Tennessee Valley Authority

Department of Transportation

Department of Treasury

Total:  J»9
^Questionnaires were mailed to federal agency offices for receiving
 and coordinating comments upon environmental impact statements
 except where noted.
                             217

-------
                           SECTION  III

        FIELD STUDIES  IN LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT


A.  Field Studies  in Local Environmental Management

Introduction

During the last few years,  local  governments on their own initiative,
in response to citizen pressure,  or in keeping with state and federal
regulations have paid increasing  attention to environmental  problems.
The diversity of their response has resulted in a myriad of  new legis-
lation, re-organization plans, and programs all aimed at better manage-
ment of the environment.  This deluge of actions, lacking any systematic
evaluation, has left government officials uncertain regarding what
actions local governments have taken to manage the environment; what
organizational changes have been  made; what programs have been adopted;
and how effective have they been.  The survey on local environmental
management, as summarized  in the  preceding chapter, does provide a
national perspective through a statistical analysis of local  governments
utilizing a particular organizational structure or environmental program.
However, since the number of local governments using any particular
innovation is quite low, generally around 20 percent, local  government of-
ficials need more  in-depth information on the various organizational
approaches and environmental programs presently being utilized.

This   part   focuses on two aspects of local environmental management:
organizational changes related to environmental problems and programmatic
actions aimed at improving environmental quality.  The purposes here are:

     —to identify innovations in local environmental management
     --to describe and analyze the various organizational and pro-
       grammatic actions taken by local governments for improving
       environmental quality
     —to develop some general guidelines for program development in
       which potential  problems and improvements are outlined

Before getting into this part, a word of caution  is  in order.   Each
local government has its own unique set of environmental problems and
operating context.  Therefore, an organizational and programmatic
action should not be adopted without consideration of the local environ-
mental problems and some modification for the local context.  The
remainder of this chapter  is divided  into four parts:  a discussion
of data collection methods, an analysis of organizational changes designed
to deal with environmental  problems, an analysis of environmental
programs presently used by local  governments, and a general  conclusion.
                               218

-------
INVESTIGATIVE DESIGN

In areas such as environmental management, where there is limited
experience to guide the actions of others, researchers have found
intensive study of selected examples to be particularly useful  for
stimulating new insights and for suggesting alternative courses of
action.  A clear distinction needs to be made between what is labelled
the case study approach and the analysis of examples which was  the
approach for the field studies.  The heuristic quality of the latter
approach is stressed since the analysis is aimed at stimulating
insights.  In addition, while the case study focuses on records of
a particular agency or organization, the analysis of examples deals with
an intense study of selected instances in which the phenomenon  is
an interesting and innovative example.  This method not only involves
the examination of records, but it also involves unstructured interviews
and observations.   In this project, the examples analyzed are selected
local governments  which have developed and are implementing innovative
organizational and programmatic actions for managing the environment.
The analysis of examples providesa more comprehensive and accurate
picture of environmental programs.

The primary source of data is four field studies conducted during the
spring, 1973-  In  selecting local governments with innovative environ-
mental management  programs, the following criteria were utilized:

     —more than one well developed environmental program (i.e.,
       environmental  quality standards, environmental impact assessment,
       environmental  planning, etc.)
     —adopted organizational changes to deal with environmental
       problems (i.e., citizen advisory boards, "mini" EPA, adminis-
       trative committees, intergovernmental agreements, etc.)
     --geographical representation with local governments from the
       east, midwest, south and west
     — representation of various sizes and types of local governments
     --cooperative attitudes of local government officials
     — representation of different types of environment problems (i.e.,
       water, air, solid waste, wastewater, noise, etc.)
     —one regional effort
     --project budget limitations

After reviewing the environmental programs in numerous cities and after
consultation with  their staffs, the following local governments were
visited by research teams:

     —Dal las, Texas
     --Inglewood,  California
     —Miamisburg, Ohio
     --Piedmont Triad  (Greensboro-Winston Salem area), North Carolina
                                219

-------
In order to aid the reader in understanding the research and to
provide overall focal points for the analysis of the four field studies,
a brief research design is presented.  The analysis is on two levels:
(l) an overview of local programs for managing the environment, and
(2) an in-depth analysis of specific environmental management strategies.
The basic research questions are:

     —What is considered in the term "environment"?
     —What is environmental management?
     --What environmental programs have been developed and implemented
       by local governments?
     —What stimulated the action by local government in the environ-
       ment?
     —How effective have the environmental programs been in improving
       the quality of the environment?
     —What problems have local governments had In their environmental
       programs?
     --What organization changes have taken place in local governments
       as a result of environmental considerations?
     —What suggestions can be made for future local environmental
       management programs?

Although these questions provide a broad focus, the investigators need
a list of variables and related research questions on which they can
concentrate their attention  (see Appendix D). Seven basic variables were
used:  (1) the general condition of the environment (living and physical),
(2) the attitudes and opinions of the community toward the environment,
(3) the political and legal context of the local government, CO the
environmental policies, (5) the administrative organization for environ-
mental affairs, (6) strategies for environmental management, and (7)
the intergovernmental relations in environmental management.  This
list  is not designed to be totally comprehensive since there were unique
features for each field study.  However, each investigative team included
all variables in their  investigation.  When the research teams were
pressed for time, the emphasis was placed on the analysis of the
environmental management strategy and its viability.

The field studies were conducted by research teams.  Each team was
composed of one project staff person, who served as head of the research
team; a member of the Environmental Management Advisory Board*: and
a member of the ICMA staff.  The project staff person had the responsibility
of collecting all material and writing up the results.
 *Environmental  Management  Advisory  Board  consists  of  Douglas  Ayres,
  City  Manager,  Inglewood,  California;  Richard  Gray, City  Manager,
  Norman,  Oklahoma;  Bert  Johnson,  County Manager, Arlington, Virginia;
  and John Laney,  City Manager,  Miamisburg,  Ohio.
                                220

-------
FIELD STUDY CONDUCT

Each of the research teams followed the same procedures in conducting
its  investigation.  First, in order to have a successful field study,
the research team members prepared themselves by becoming familiar with
information about the local government and its environmental programs.
The groundwork helped in establishing friendly relationships with the
local government officials which facilitated the free flow of information.
The relationship was established as far ahead as possible, at least
one month ahead of the visit.  This entailed the project staff inter-
viewing by phone the chief administrator in order that problems could
be worked out ahead of time, interview schedules established, and
information gathered.  Each team member had the responsibility for
familiarizing himself/herself with the organization and documents
forwarded to him, particularly administrative reports, legislation,
newspaper articles and budgets.   In addition, a tentative interview
schedule was prepared by the project staff and distributed ahead of time.

Second, a meeting of the research team was held the evening before the
field study was to commence.   In some cases, it was advantageous to
invite the local administrator or his representative to part of the
meeting so any preliminary questions could be resolved early.  At that
time the team would follow this prescribed agenda:

     —get acquainted
     — identification of tasks
     —distribution of tasks
     --review of background material with a brief session by project
       staff
     --identification of critical variables
     —finalization of interview schedule
     --clarification of field study goals
     --development of questions for interviews

This meeting was critical to the success of the project.   The investi-
gative plan developed at this meeting was continually re-evaluated and
revised as the field study progressed.

Third, the next two days were used for conducting the field study.  The
data for the field study were collected primarily through interviews,
although members of the research teams did attend some meetings as
observers.  However, the procedures varied in each field study from
informal  interviews to a formal  presentation by the local  chief
executive and his staff; one meeting included a tour of a local  waste-
water treatment plant.  Since not every official within the community
could be interviewed, the research teams did attempt to interview an
individual from each of the following categories:

     --local politician,either mayor or city councilman
     --chief administrator and his staff
                               221

-------
     —members of citizens' advisory board
     —newsman from the local paper
     —planning department
     —environmental staff
     —public works department
     — representatives from the business community (Chamber of Commerce)
     —county and regional governmental officials

After the field study was completed, the research team would meet
briefly to review their work.  At this time, materials would be collated
and the write-up discussed.  Each team member prepared a summary of his/her
views and ideas generated from the field visit.

Fourth, after collecting the material from the research team, the project
staff member was responsible for writing up the case study.  Emphasis
was placed on identifying unique programs and evaluating their effective-
ness in promoting environmental quality.  In addition, problems were
identified and possible solutions suggested.  A draft study was written
and sent to research team members and local government officials
involved in the field visit for review and comment.  When the comments
were received, a final field study report was prepared.  The final reports
for Dallas, Inglewood, Miamisburg and Piedmont Triad can be found in the
following sections.

Since some organizational changes and environmental programs were not
covered during the four field studies, additional data was used later
to fill in the knowledge gaps.  The primary source of this supplemental
information was the materials returned with the survey questionnaire.
A second source was materials collected in conjunction with the National
Conference for Managing the Environment.  Many local officials who
participated provided meaningful examples of innovations in local
environmental management.  Finally, the International City Management
Association has compiled an extensive file on  local government programs
based on materials sent to the Association by  its members.

Like any other research strategy, not all social  researchers agree with
the use of examples.  The fact that these investigations are taking
place after many events have occurred upsets "purists" in social
research.  They claim that the investigations  lack scientific credibility
since there is no manipulation of variables.  Because of the possibility
of criticism, research teams kept in mind the following potential
weaknesses in order to minimize them:

     —The investigators had to avoid wandering  into other interesting
       features which were totally  irrelevant  to the example being
       analyzed.  The focus on local environmental management was
       emphasized even though the local government had undertaken other
       interesting programs.
     --There was a general lack of precision with which the situation
       was being viewed.  The  investigator had to avoid letting his
       own prejudices and values bias his observations.
                               222

-------
     --Casual relations and inferences were avoided.  The investigators
       tried to avoid drawing the conclusion that because certain
       events preceded governmental action that these events caused govern-
       mental action.  For example, occurrence of an environmental crisis
       may or may not have caused the development of environmental
       programs.  These programs may have been considered and action
       taken before the crisis.

It should be stressed again that the analysis of examples leads to
insights and suggestions for future actions and should not be construed
as a test or generalization of effectiveness.  Each case has its own
unique features and special characteristics which make it atypical.
Although these cases have yielded much fruitful information, there are
risks in making any generalizations based entirely on the analysis of
four examples.  The remainder of this chapter integrates and analyzes
the findings of these four field studies.
                               223

-------
B.  Local Organization for Environmental Management


There are three aspects of organizing for environmental  management:
(1) local internal organizational structure; (2)  structure for citizen
participation; and (3) intergovernmental structures and  arrangements.
With the rapid expansion of environmental concern and activity at the
local  government level, traditional organizational arrangements may not
prove to be adequate.  A traditional  internal organization for dealing
with environmental concerns would include several distinct departments
and divisions based on function, such as refuse,  water,  sewage treat-
ment,  and land use planning,  with no  one place where all  environmentally
relevant functions are brought together for coordination or integration.

The local organization pattern for citizen participation is similarly
diffuse, in that opportunities for continuing involvement traditionally
have been in the form of board and commission activity.   Environ-
mental concerns may be fragmented between several citizen boards,
e.g.,  planning commission, beautification committee, parks and
recreation board, and therefore no focus exists for citizen concern
about the environment.

Because of the regional nature of many environmental problems, area-
wide solutions or efforts are often needed.  Unfortunately, in most
areas there is no accepted regional organizational structure within
which to address these problems.  Local governments are  increasingly
forced to seek solutions through regional systems, although many of
the existing regional systems are not well developed.

As a result of perceived inadequacies  in the three areas, some local
administrators have taken steps to organize themselves more effectively
to implement environmental programs.    In responding to the organization-
al dilemma, local managers consider the following factors:  (l)
political pressures from environmental groups, business  interests,
civic groups, and other interested citizens; (2)   legal requirements,
particularly state laws governing the actions of  local governments,
(3) personalities in  the organization;  (4) financial abilities of
the local government,  including tax limitations,  and, (5) staff
capabilities, particularly their skills  in environmental management.
To illustrate the organizational approaches utilized by local  govern-
ments, examples are drawn from the four case studies relating to
internal organization, citizen boards  and commissions, and intergovern-
mental  relations.  Other examples are  used where appropriate.
 INTERNAL ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

As mentioned above, under the traditional structure of local governments,
environmental functions usually are dispersed through several
departments and agencies  (see Figure 1).  Such traditional structures
                              224

-------
                                        Figure 1.
  u
LU I—

g <





LU <


.  tt:



t°

U

_-
u
£
a£ ~
Q t~ t,
Z LU ^
<° 5
uj
o
Q
"
2-
O
^
it
"~ n 5
— ~

££ Q
S ^
1"
\



o_
O o
LU i
u ±

z
U-


t—
D-
 5: £

x 6
z
s

                        ^ — C
                        i.
              < a
              • •
-
LU -^
^ 9 c.
o ^ S
^ CE: "7
*^ C
Q SI i
>- 7-J
^ «-
IP
6 <
u





	



0
z
(7
g
x °-
^ >- a!
"" LU "
Z <
-j
Zi
CQ



£1
c 5
-^ al
— ^
<
^



i—
o.
Q ^
2 ^
Z ^
?
^~

D
Z ^
5 i
?^ I
O a.
oj Q ^
^ ^
u- ^.
u_ tr
                                                                                       QJ ~ o


                                                                                      ( £ * £
                                           225

-------
have led to problems of coordination between departments in several
other areas in addition to the environment.  However, the environmental
area is perhaps more sensitive to this problem because of its interrelated
nature.  For example, the disposal of solid waste  through incineration
may in turn cause an air pollution problem.  There is a need, therefore,
to achieve collaboration between people engaged in environmental activities
throughout all departments and levels.  Generally, this means the
development of specialized staff.  Depending upon the needs of the local
government, and the role created for the staff, the responses may range
from a single  individual assigned environmental duties on a part or
full time basis to a department with 21,000 employees as in New York City's
Environmental  Protection Agency.

There are two  primary questions for organizing environmental manage-
ment :

      1.  Which program areas are to be coordinated, e.g., air pollution
          control, water supply, sewage treatment, solid waste collection
          and  disposal, parks and recreation, flood control, noise control?
      2.  Which functions are to be coordinated, e.g., data collection
          and analysis, program development, planning, operation, contact
          with other governmental units, response to citizens inquiries?

In the following sections of this chapter,  three approaches to providing
specialized staff are examined:   (1)  expansion of the functions  of an
existing agency; (2)  creation of a new agency solely with environmental
functions; or (3)  formation of a staff committee or  task force.


Expansion of an Existing Agency to Include Environmental Functions

 Instead of creating a  totally new environmental agency, a  number of
municipalities  have expanded the responsibilities of existing depart-
ments.   In 1970,  Inglewood, California established an Environmental
Standards Division (ESD) which was originally placed in the Building
Department,  although reporting directly  to the City Manager.  Subsequently,
a  second  reorganization placed the Environmental Standards Division  in
the Planning and Development Department.  The rationale behind  its
creation  was:

      --the  manager wanted  environmental considerations to become  institu-
         tionalized in  departmental decision  making, as opposed  to having
         responsibility for  the environmental considerations reside  in
        a single department
      --because of the diffused environmental concern, cooperative  instead
        of adversary relationships could more easily be created between
         departments
      --the  placement  of ESD  in the Planning and Development  Department
         should  assure  the  environment  being  considered early  in decision
        making  processes
                                226

-------
      --the Planning and Development Department had many skills needed
        in environmental protection, and the creation of a separate
        department would result in considerable overlapping of
        funct ions and ski 1 Is
      --a new environmental  department would face the problems of any
        new department particularly in establishing relations with
        other departments
      --the manager's approach for acquiring environmental expertise was to
        train existing staff with current staff in the Planning and
        Development Department having the proper mixture of economic
        realities and environmental necessities
      --the City of Inglewood is small enough for the environmental
        function not to overwhelm the Planning and Development Department

Today, the Environmental Standard Division has the primary responsibili-
ties for the environmental  assessment process as well as monitoring and
enforcing noise level standards.  Other environmental programs, notably
solid waste collection and  water and sewer, remain in the traditional
departments.

A similar situation exists  in Dallas, Texas where the coordination
function resides principally in the city manager's office, although an
environmental planning section in the Urban Design Division provides
staff assistance.  Other responsibilities for environmental management
are spread through several  other departments, including:

      .  The Public Works Department, containing programs for solid
        waste collection and disposal and recycling
      .  Air Pollution Control Section of the Health Department with the
        responsibility for  enforcing air quality regulations
      .  Water Quality Section of the Health Department, with responsibility
        for enforcing water quality standards
      .  Environmental Conservation Administration of the Health Depart-
        ment
      .  Water Utilities Department, which operates a demonstration
        treatment plant aimed at water reclamation, and conducts
        research in cooperation with Texas A and M University on waste
        water treatment

Attempts to accomplish a more comprehensive reorganization have been
hampered by state laws which require air and water pollution control
functions to be placed in the Health Department under the direction
of a physician.


Creation of Local Environmental Agency

Other municipalities have created separate organizational entities for
environmental management.  These may take the form of either staff or
line agencies.   Although none of the field study cities had created a
separate agency, some brief examples are given.
                                   227

-------
In 1968, New York City created a separate line agency containing bureaus
for air, water and sanitation.  This agency has a staff of over 21,000
employees and a current operating budget of $500 million.  The New York
City EPA has equal status with other municipal departments with its
primary role being that of an environmental advocate.  Paul Zimmerman,
First Deputy Administrator has pointed to two strengths for creation of
a separate agency:  (1) development of staff expertise; and (2) long
range view of environmental problems and matters of ecological per-
spective.*  Other advantages of this approach include:  (l) consolidation
of fragmented activities;  (2) reduction of proliferation of boards and
commissions; (3)  increased public visibility of a new department;  (4)
increased accountability on environmental matters; and  (5) facilitation
of administrative efficiencies.
As an alternative to the newly created line environmental department,
many municipalities have established a separate staff agency.  Although
the size and placement within the organization may vary, this staff
agency generally has the responsibilities of research, program planning
and development, program coordination, advise on environmentally related
matters, and liaison with other governmental bodies and community groups.
An example of this approach can be found in Fairfax County, Virginia.

In a report to the Fairfax County executive, the line approach was rejected
because "concern with environmental quality is not a function or activity,
but a dimension or aspect of many activities."*  A projection of the
content of a line environmental department  in Fairfax County can be
seen in Figure 2.  Reasons for not creating this department  included:
(l) the department would be so large and contain sufficiently diverse
elements as to be unmanageable; (2) personnel with environmental duties
also have non-environmental responsibilities.  Rather, a staff agency was
recommended in order to:   (1) provide an agency concerned with the overall
environment; (2) serve as a focal point for citizens; (3) coordinate
environmental programs,  (4) maintain familiarity with environmental
information; and, (5) provide a general,  continuing review and evaluation
of county policies, programs and operations as they relate to the physical
envi ronment.
*Speech by Paul Zimmerman at the National Conference on Managing the
 Environment, May  U,  1973-

+Report on the need  in the Fairfax County government for a governmental
 function charged with responsibility for those physical environmental
 affairs...July, 1972.
                                228

-------
                                                                  EXHIBIT  I.

                                                         HYPOTHETICAL  ORGANIZATION CHART
                                                                   DEPARTMENT OF
                                                              PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENTAL
                                                                      AFFAIRS
                    DIRECTOR,
              POLLUTION CONTROL
              PLAN'S AND PROGRAMS
         COUNTY
      SEWER SYSTEM
      (All  Farts)
             Preparation of plans and
             programs; provision of
             guidance; and coordination
             of County agencies con-
             cerned with pollution con-
             trol.  Provision of staff
             support to the Environ-
             mental Quality Advisory
             Council
                  2 personnel
                  $36,000
Collection and treatment
of sanitary sewage in
Fairfax County, except
that associated with septic
systems
      322 personnel
        $6,680,020
     SOLID WASTE
       DIVISION
    AIR POLLUTION
   CONTROL DIVISION
Collection of solid waste
in designated areas;
operation of Fairfax
County landfills.
      135 personnel
        $2,678,236
Preserve and improve
the air resources of
Fairfax County
        8 personnel
          $105,477
1 —
1
1
1
1
Siltation
and Erosion
Control
educe or elim-
amagliig effects
f soil erosion
_ 	 yart ot jftyei
i
cy__

DfcV.iKrMJl.i: Of COUNTY «2V
/
Public Law
566 Program

Reduce or elim-
erosion, and '
siltation prob-
tnd the resulting lems through land
iltation of
ounty streams






trcatmcnt programs
of impoundment
structures







EL«»H£IT
j
Flood
Main
Management


^ _ p
i
i
j




Noise and
Dust Ordi-
nance En-







Reduce flooding Reduce threats
damage through
regulation
of land use
in flood plain














health and
• welfare by




controlling
noise and dust




















-_ 	 _ 	 . 	 — E«t-Si Ag£B£V 	 	 	 	
1 1 • !
i i i
i i :



Cooptnciw
Extension
DfClce
Health Pept. Fire and
Knvironrcnlal Rescue
Sanitation Services
1
1

fait fax
County Park
Authority 1
1 II-




Environmental
Improvement
Activities

Stream Control of
Sampling Hazardous
Program Substances


Conservation
Program




Assistance to Monitor quality Regulate the Monitor siltatj
regarding soil, streams and transpor- related probls'i
insecticides, tation of high- in parklands ai
pesticides, et ly flammable or adjacent areas
cetera otherwise
dangerous
substances



CONTRIBUTIONS ONLY




1
UPPER OCCOQUAN
SEWER AUTHORITY





I
NORTHERN VIRGINIA
REGIONAL
PARK AUTHORITY

1 1

Collection, disposal Open space management
and treatment of sewage
in regional parks
NORTHERN VIRGINIA
SOIL AND WATER
:ONSERVATI01» IISTSIC
FAIRFAX COUNTY
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIT
I ADVISORY COUNCIL

t

Support soil conserve- Concern with all physical
tion practices environmental affairs






                   in the Occoquan
                   watershed
                   $ (included in amount
                     shown for County
                     sewer system)
                                     $26,438
                            in Fairfax County


                                $  (included in that
                                 shown for Director,
                                 Pollution Control Plans
                                 and Programs)
"Note:
        No data is presented regarding the staffing and coat of these progra
        because in each case the personnel involved have other duties and
        responsibilities as well.
b
 Totals do not include staffing or costs for programs indicated by "a".
 It should be understood, however, that these programs would require
 significant amounts of resources, were they assigned to the hypothetical
 department.
                                                                   TOTAL AMOUNTS: 467 personnel6

                                                                                $ 9,526,173b
                                                             229

-------
Administrative Committee

A third approach for achieving a more effective organization for
environmental affairs is the creation of an administrative committee,
task  force, or administrative council.  The City of Ann Arbor, Michigan
created an Administrative Environmental Committee for the purposes of
(1) overseeing environmental programs and other city operations
which might have an effect on the environment, (2) setting standards
for environmental control, and (3) investigating and reporting at the
request of Council or Administrator on environmental issues related to
city services.  The committee, which is chaired by the Assistant City
Administrator for Environmental Engineering, is composed of the heads of
operating departments.

Another variation to the administrative committee has been the team
management approach of Metropolitan Government of Nashville/Davidson
County.  With the aid of a Ford Foundation grant, the Environmental
Planning and Management Project started in July, 1972, with the purpose
of experimenting with the use of management teams for better environmental
management.  The management team consists of five individuals represent-
ing the major environmental agencies of the Metro Government, the
executive director of the Metro Planning Commission, the planning
director of Metro Planning, the director of the Department of Health,
director of Public Works, and the director of the Department of Law.
In addition, a three member top management team for the project was
created with a representative of local government (an assistant to  the mayor),
chairman of the Nashville Area Chamber of Commerce, and professor for
the Graduate School of Management, Vanderbilt University.  These two
groups coordinate the concerns, the ideas, and capabilities of local
government, business, industry, and citizens.  The teams have focused
on such issues as the meat packing plants and their violation of the
Waste Water Ordinance and completion of a hydrogeology and water quality
analysis of a landfill.

Although there seems to be some consensus on the need to establish some
environmental unit to serve a coordinating or integrating function,
the specific form adopted depends upon the unique needs of each local
government.  In small cities it may be possible for the chief executive
to fulfill this need.  Examples of  other local governments' organization
for environmental management can be seen  in Figure  2.


BOUNDARY SPANNING PROCESSES FOR CITIZEN PARTICIPATION

Boundary spanning processes encompass those activities and structures
used by organizations to achieve direct contact between governmental
officials and clientele groups and individuals.   In the past, local
governments have relied on voting in elections, public hearings, and open public
meetings and citizen commissions.  However, recent environmental legislation at the
federal level has stressed the development of new mechanisms for securing
citizen input.  Two prominent examples of increased public participation
                               230

-------
result from the environmental  impact statement process set forth in
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and from the 1972
amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.

Some local governments have been reluctant to develop means for
citizen input on environmental matters, claiming that:

      a. citizens lack the technical expertise and knowledge to deal
         with complex environmental problems;

      b. citizens' past experiences with boards and commissions have not
         proven to be very effective means for securing a broad sense
         of the community's position on issues; and

      c. significant citizen  input may increase uncertainty within the
         organization which may result in a decrease  in organizational
         effectiveness.

In addition, where mechanisms for citizen input have been developed,
many local governments have given them minimal power and authority and
inadequate staff support.

Yet, most municipalities have met with greater success and tangible
benefits from public participation.  This section analyzes some of the
popular mechanisms for citizen participation in environmental matters,
notably citizen boards and commissions.  In the past  local boards concerned
with environmental matters were quasi-judicial boards  involved in air
or water pollution control.  Recently boards have broadened their per-
spective of the environment.  Examples follow of how these boards are
organized, including expansion of existing boards, creation of new
boards, and use of conservation commissions.
Expansion of Existing Board

Instead of creating a new environmental board or commission, existing
boards and commissions in many cities have been modified to more
effectively deal with environmental issues.  The rationale behind the
restructuring is as follows:

      1.  to avoid further proliferation of citizen boards in the local
          government.

      2.  to reduce the number of citizens' boards

      3.  to avoid possible overlapping of environmental related functions

      k.  to integrate environmental concerns with other functions of
          local  governments.
                               231

-------
FIGURE 2.  EXAMPLES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ORGANIZATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL

                               MANAGEMENT


                        Environmental  Coordinator

    Add ison ,  111i no is
    University City,  Missouri
    Manhattan Beach,  California
    San Jose, California
                          Environmental Planner
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Lakeland, Colorado
    Norman, Oklahoma
    Waco, Texas
                          Environmental Section
    Austin, Texas                   Office of Environmental Resource Management
    Inglewood, California           Environmental Standards Division
    Palo Alto, California           Environmental Planning Office
    Montgomery County, Md.          Environmental Planning Office
    Fairfax County, Virginia        Office of Environmental Affairs

                        Environmental Department

    New York City, N. Y.            Environmental Protection Agency
    Huntington, N. Y.               Environmental Protection Agency
    Simi Valley, California         Environmental Services Department
    Chicago,  Illinois               Department of Environmental Control
    Washington, D. C.               Department of Environmental Services
    San Diego County, Ca.           Environmental Development Agency
    Los Angeles, California         Environmental Quality

                  Environmental Task Force or Committee

    Ann Arbor, Michigan
    Nashville/Davidson County, Tennessee
    Volusia County, Florida
                                  232

-------
 In Guilford County, North Carolina, board members were appointed based on
 their expertise.   In March, 1973, the County Commissioners created the
 Guilford County Advisory Board for Environmental Quality (GCABEQ) as a
 permanent board.   Its purposes were:

      1.  to provide technical information and supplemental advice to
          Guilford County Board

      2.  to aid governmental units to maintain and/or improve environ-
          mental conditions, and

      3-  to assure safe, healthful, and aesthetically pleasing
          surroundings for all inhabitants, present and future.

 County board members felt the county lacked the internal  expertise to
 handle many environmental problems, and therefore turned to the
 resources and expertise  in the community.  Fortunately, within the
 County are two colleges where some of the expertise could be found --
 North Carolina A £ T and the University of North Carolina, Greensboro.
 The members of the BEQ are appointed by the County Board of Commissioners
 for initial terms of 1, 2, or 3 years with succeeding appointments for
 3 years.  The BEQ  is composed of one each of the following specialists:
 — air resources, water resources, land resources, vascular plants,
 societal affairs, aesthetic concerns, urban technology or public health,
 legal affairs or economics, and public communications or education.

 In addition to the ten members, a Community Liaison was appointed for
 a one year term by the County Commission to act as a go-between with
 the BEQ. and other community groups, particularly ones interested in
 environmental affairs.  This person disseminates information, encourages
 citizen groups to recognize and use BEQ, and channels information
 from citizen groups to BEQ.  The BEQ is supported by one staff member of
 the Planning Department.
Rather than creating a permanent board or commission, many local govern-
ments have established environmental  advisory committees for a specified
length of time and a definite objective.  Such advisory committees
usually are charged to study environmental  problems and make recommen-
dations to the legislative body.

The City of Dallas was the only community in the field studies which
utilized a temporary advisory committee.  The newly elected Dallas
Mayor, having based his campaign on law and order and the environ-
ment, appointed a 3~man Council committee in July, 1971, to study
the feasibility of creating a City Environmental Quality Board.
He further suggested that it have approximately 8 members, including 1 high
school and 1  college student, at least 2 from industry, and the remainder
from the general  public.   On September, 1971, this committee reported
its recommendations, in which it supported  establishment of a 15~member
committee whose membership would be drawn from those in the city with
                                 233

-------
useful knowledge and expertise, e.g., Architects, Planners, Landscape
Architects, Engineers, Medical Societies, Home Builders, Real  Estate,
Professionals, Industry, Environmental Organizations, League of Women
Voters, A.A.U.W., High School Students, College Students.  Their term
of office was to cease on June 1, 1972 upon completion of their report.
Their general objective was to develop a city-wide environmental policy
considering water quality, air quality, noise pollution, visual pollution,
open space, land use, population, and solid waste.  In addition, the
report identified the following tasks:

      1.  Assessment of environmental preservation action and  improve-
          ments accomplished or in progress.

      2.  Identification of instances where environmental improvements can
          be made.

      3.  Inventory and documentation of community environmental
          problems, ranking them in order of severity of effects on
          residents.

      k.  Identification of needs for:
                a)  research, experimentation and expanded special
                    environmental projects;
                b)  planning strategies;
                c)  programs for public information

      5.  Definition of an appropriate city role  in the solution of
          environmental problems.

      6.  Submission of recommendations for new and additional ordinances
          and regulations for environmental improvements.

      7.  Development of recommended changes in city procedures, programs,
          or activities that contribute to our environmentaKproblem.

      8.  Suggestions as to means of creating an awareness of environmental
          problems throughout the community, and  lastly,

      9.  Identification of opportunities for community cooperation,
          inter-agency cooperation and  intergovernmental cooperation
          in programs to improve the environment.

On September 27,  197', the City Council passed an ordinance virtually
identical to the  recommendation.  In January, 1972, the Council passed
a new ordinance repealing the earlier one, and making the following
modifications: (1) a tenth task was added allowing the CEQB to bring
in other related matters which might aid the City Council;  (2) a six
month life span from date of swearing  in; and, (3) an increase  in
membership to seventeen.
                                23**

-------
Among the cities studied, the City of Inglewood purposely expanded
existing boards to encompass environmental concerns.  In August, 1971,
in response to political considerations, a desire to streamline the
appeals process and some environmental problems, the Planning Com-
mission, Board of Zoning Appeals, Board of Building Appeals, and Board
of Fire Appeals were dissolved.  Their functions were reconstituted into
a five-member Planning and Zoning Board and a five-member Construction
Appeals Board.  The two boards combined form the Community Environment
Commission (CEC) which is mandated to meet quarterly, or on the call of
the chairman which rotates quarterly between the two board chairmen.
                            Figure 3.

        Organization of Environmental Board in Inglewood
Community Environment Commission
Planning and
Zon i ng Boa rd
Construct ion
Appeals Board
Each councilman and the Mayor names one member of each board.  No
particular emphasis is placed upon their expertise or concern for the
environment.  However, city officials expect the CEC members to develop
some degree of environmental expertise.  The primary function at the
present time is taking appeals on local environmental impact statements.

In another example the City of St. Petersburg abolished the Planning
Commission and created in its place a new environmental board.

Existing boards and commissions may automatically and unofficially expand
their concerns to  include the environment as it relates to their primary
charge, e.g., zoning,  in response to public interest.
Creation of a New Environmental Board
The creation of a new citizen board by local governments has been a
popular approach for increasing citizen input.  Two alternative types of
membership are used, depending on the purpose of their creation.

      1.    general or "representative" citizen input providing a broad
            view of community values on such  issues as quality of life,
            physical and social environment, and

      2.    specialized technical expertise on environmental problems to
            provide resources presently unavailable to the local government

None of the citizen boards in the field studies utilized a general
membership advisory board on the environment.
                                235

-------
With the assistance of three staff members from the Department of
Planning and Urban Development, the CEQB distributed a questionnaire to
city departments followed by oral testimony, survey of local  environmental
and community groups, and held two public hearings.  Their report was
not completed at the time of the preparation of this report.

A similar approach has been taken by the City of Cincinnati,  Ohio where
a Citizens' Environmental Task Force completed a year-long study of the
city's environmental problems.  The members of the Task Force were
appointed by the Mayor and approved by the City Council based on their
expertise in a specific environmental related area.  Their task was
to investigate air, water, noise, land use, solid waste, and  energy
problems.  The Task Force organized themselves into sub-committees which
were in charge of the report for a specific area.  They all held at least
one hearing, submitted interim status reports, and distributed minutes of
meetings.

      Additional examples of citizen environmental commissions can be
found  in  Figure k .
Conservation Commission
Another organizational approach for citizen participation, one used
in Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island,
New York, and New Jersey, is the conservation commission.  The commissions
are authorized in state enabling legislation and municipal ordinances
for the general purposes of land acquisition, coordination and planning
for environmental protection.  Examples of their activities include:

      —coordinating body working with local environmental groups to
        preserve the natural environment
      --serving as a focal point for organizing environmental  projects
      —acquiring property  on approval of the appropriate governing
        body,  in the name of the municipality and administering use
        of that land.
      --conducting studies and making recommendations.

The important differences which separate conservation commissions and
regular citizen boards are state sponsorship, eligibility for state
funding, and ability to acquire land.


INTERGOVERNMENTAL ARRANGEMENTS

Where many environmental problems transcend local political boundaries,
regional or areawide solutions have received greater attention.  Although
there is seldom controversy over the desirability of addressing certain
problems on a regional basis, controversy flourishes regarding how to
structure regional approaches.
                                236

-------
  *

  3
  -h
  O
 O
 O
 a-
 re
 Q.
 3

 3
 o
 -I
 a.

 3
 01
 3
 O
 n
 Ul
 Ul
 rt
 01
 3
(O
re
o

Ul
m
Q.
3
01
<•

2
•••
3
rfi
Ul
O
rt
01










m
3
<

-i
O
3
i
3
rt
QJ

(O

01

— ••
rt
•^

O
3
— •
Ul
Ul
— •
O
3




+
CD

re


jf
a.
•















o
Q
3

_.
Ul
Ul
o'

O
-t

m
3

•_*
T
O
3
i
rt
0)


|0
01
.<



+
TJ
3"
8
3

X


^
-t
N*













m
3
<

-1
O
3
1
rt
01

jO

0)

_•
rt
•^

O
5f
— «

C
Ul
rt
3
,0

H
re
X
Ul













0
—•
rt
Q) — .
3 N
a. re
3
m ui
3 -
— • CO
O 0)
3 1
3 CL

3 0
rt -h
01
— • Z
01
(O rt
0) O
Z! 01
rt —
«^
30

1
re
Ul


+
r-
01
0
T
01
3
to
n


~

,











m
3
<

T
0
3
3
r+
01

^0

0)

_•
rt
^

O
O
rt

O


O
Ul
I/I
5'
3
+
C
re
ui
rt
01
3
O.
M

7
.






~U






m
3
<

-I
O
3
n
3
rt
01

^0

01

^»
rt
^

0
s
..
Ul
Ul

o'




+

C
01
rt
1C


O
0)
-•*
-tl






u






m
3
<
CO — .
re T
01 O
C 3
rt 3
-h 3

n oi
0) — .
rt
— O
O O
3 3
rt
0 -i
O O

9
-. 0)
Ul 3
Ul Q.

5' 0
3 —
^
_•
O




+

re
rt
3"
Ol
3

«*

O
^"
01






~D






m
3
<

n
O
3
3
rt
01

f)

3
rt

O


CL
_,
I/I
O
-1

0°
01
D.




>
3
3
01
TJ
O

_.
Ul


CL






""






>
3
3
01

Q
-
Ul
m
3
_•
-1
o


re
3
rt
01
O
O

3
w(
Ul
Ul
8





+ + + +
+• + + +
+ +
+ + +
+
+ +
•f-
+ + +
"*•
+
to
•o
re


— h rt

re
Q.



,0
C
0)

rt
re

•<*



t/>
•D
re
o z
— o
-h rt

Q.



^
3
3
C
01






to
XI
re

— •• o
-h rt

re
CL



j>
3
3
C
01
_^





to
XI
re
o •z.
— o
-h rt

re
CL



CO
XI
(ft
o z
— o
-h rt

re
CL



2 3
re o —
re -h 3
rt C
— • rt
3 re
(Q Ul




to
XI
n
n z
— o
-tl rt

2.'





o

rt








-D H m
re re x
13 >

3-1 1—
re 01 m
3 T tO
rt ~<
O
O
o
l~
o
^ ^
HH

M ,i
m S
z S
o z *•
3 < *

ui o
ui z

O m
3 Z
— t

f*—

O
o
^
^
(/)
to

o
z




General






















































Air
Waste
Solid Waste
Noise
Visual
Land
Recreation
Beaut if icat ion
Environmental
Environmental
30
re
.0 30
c re
— X)
-i o

g=.
3 3
rt IQ
I/I
Health
Clean-up











                                                          237

-------
While regional systems to meet environmental needs are not new (Boston
initiated a regional water system in 1889), they have not been
prevalent until the last decade.  The reasons for the upsurge in
regional arrangements include:  (l)  more obvious benefits to local
governments, such as cost savings and (2) new state and federal
regulations and financial incentives.  A variety of regional approaches
have been developed, including intergovernmental agreements, regional
planning commissions, councils of governments, special districts,
functional planning bodies, consolidated city/county forms, metropolitan
federations, and compacts.

The key factors influencing local participation in regional programs
include:  (l)  Is it technically feasible? (2) What program functions
(e.g., planning, financing, operations)  get regionalized?  (3) Who
controls the regional system? (*t) How much will it cost? (5) What
level of service will it provide, and (6) How strong are the pressures
to regionalize?  For a regional  program to be successful, each individual
jurisdiction must perceive the benefits received, such as  lower unit
costs  to be greater than the costs  the degree of control over local
affairs relinquished.  Four forms found in the cities studied will be
discussed in the following text; namely intergovernmental agreements,
regional planning commissions, councils of governments, and special
districts.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS

Three examples of how agreements can be used in managing environmental
programs are the Montgomery County  (Ohio) Solid Waste Program, the
Guilford County (North Carolina) Solid Waste Pulverization Program, and
the air pollution control program of the Combined General Health
District (Ohio).

Montgomery County Solid Waste Program

In 1970, most of Montgomery County, including Miamisburg, initiated a
comprehensive solid waste program by agreement.  Prior to the program's
creation, improper landfill operations, a dwindling supply of land,
and growing concern about ground water contamination from landfills
were problems pressing for attention.  At the same time the county
began  investigating the use of  incineration, the City of Dayton decided
that  its own  incinerator needed to  be  replaced.  Subsequently, a
consultant study for the Montgomery County Health Department made the
recommendation that a countywide disposal system be established where
solid waste would be collected and  transported via transfer stations to
incinerators for disposal.  It was  further recommended that the incinera-
tors be owned and operated by the county because of its greater borrowing
power.  The study proposed that two incinerators be constructed initially.
                                  238

-------
The system is presently operated by the County Sanitation Department,
under service agreements with the local governments in the County.
Generally, the agreements cover all solid waste with the possible
exception of some materials that are part of recycling programs.  Seven
of thirteen municipalities in the County have formal contracts.  The
remaining six cities participate and pay on a fee basis.  The cost
per ton  is the same.

The agreements also provide for an Advisory Board to the program made
up of six members; one appointed by the County, one by the City of
Dayton, one each by the Montgomery County Mayor's and the Manager's
Associations, one by the Dayton area Chamber of Commerce, and one by
the recognized association of refuse haulers.  While the stated
purpose of this group is to resolve problems, in practice there is some
question as to its effectiveness.

The original  cost of refuse disposal at the incinerator was $3-50 per
ton.  Until recently haulers were charged $7-90 per ton.  Now, however,
the rates have increased dramatically to $12.50 per ton.  Although the
county subsidizes the operation by k2 cents on every ton, rates may have
to be increased even more to meet the costs of new capital equipment
required to meet new air quality standards.  This financial problem
threatens the viability of this cooperative system.
Guilford County Solid Waste Pulverization Program

In 1972, Guilford County, the City of Greensboro, and the City of High
Point signed an agreement for a cooperative solid waste processing and
disposal program.  Two years before, Guilford County had recognized
inadequacies in the solid waste programs within the county and proposed
a Tri-Governmental Solid Waste Committee (TGSWC) to attack the problem
and develop a common solution.  In December 1970, TGSWC was formed.
Its membership represented the elected and administrative personnel from
each of the jurisdictions.

The staff immediately began to investigate individual problem areas.
Sample weights of loaded municipal vehicles were taken; estimated volume
capacities and weight calculations were made on private collection
vehicles; local areas of private service were better defined; differences
in the two municipal policies and procedures were clarified; time and
distance studies were made on all  collection vehicles; and the
characteristics of local solid wastes were determined.  For the first
time, a clear picture of the total, countywide solid waste generation,
collection, and disposal situation became available.  After reviewing
alternative means of disposal, the Committee decided to initiate a
pulverization system.  To finance the system, bonds for pulverization
equipment were voted by the respective electorates, winning by better
than 4 to 1.

During the frequent meetings in July, August, and September, 1971, the
staff prepared a detailed policy and procedures manual, which included
the role and responsibility of each government.  Also included in this
                               239

-------
manual were estimated capital outlay per  installation, estimated cost of
operation, and proposed amortization schedule for each piece of equipment
and structural component.  Methods of disposal for special wastes not
suitable for pulverization were investigated and included in the manual.
A limited amount of resource recovery is also discussed in an addendum.

When a proposed draft was submitted to the elected representatives of
the TGSWC in November of 1971» it quickly became evident that a serious
disagreement existed between the County and one of the municipalities as to
the source of operating revenue.  The municipality proposed that the
operating expenses of all three stations be funded through County tax
revenue.  To facilitate this estimated annual need of $250,000,
a Countywide tax increase would have been necessary.   The County was
unwilling to authorize this Increase for several reasons, primarily
because of the disproportionate ratio between industrial generation of
solid waste versus its real property value,and the fact that many
rural citizens in the outlying parts of the County were without collection
service and therefore would be paying for a disposal  operation whether
they could utilize it or not.

The problem was finally resolved in December, 1971, by deciding to weigh each
collection vehicle as it delivered waste and bill  its owner  (be it public
or private) at the end of the month on the basis of the actual cost per
disposed ton times the actual tonnage delivered.  A nominal fee
also is charged to each private auto delivering domestic waste-  Debt
service on the capital facilities is to be met by the County from revenues
derived from a County sales tax.

The Solid Waste Committee envisions a future consolidation of all installations
under one agency  (as originally proposed) as soon as Countywide collection
is available.  Such a collection program  (probably a rural container system)
is presently  in the formulative stages.  When this single agency (probably
the County) assumes responsibility for the operation of all three installa-
tions, an annual disposal surcharge or fee will probably be  levied to each
home, business and industry  (based on actual annual tonnage generated)
in  lieu of the monthly billing, to fund the year-to-year operations.  The
vehicles will then be weighed only for recordkeeping purposes.


Combined General Health District
 In March  1971, the Montgomery County Combined General Health District was
 formed as agreements were  reached with five counties and the City of Dayton
 for  the expansion of the Montgomery County Health District air pollution
 program,  to cover the entire five county area.  Subsequently, the size of
 the  Montgomery County Combined General Health District health board was
 expanded  from five to nine members  (including five from Dayton).  However,
 the  county health districts and most of the larger cities retained their
 own  health boards.  Thus,  each policy change made by the Combined Health
 District  must receive approval from each of the city and health district
 boards.   A few communities, e.g., Oakwood, have maintained their own staff.
 However,  they still contract with the Combined General Health District for the
 air  pollution control program.
                                ZkO

-------
Originally, Health District funding was principally derived from charges
levied against member jurisdictions.  This limited source of revenue
permitted few extensive or new programs.  The development of the
successful air pollution control programs by the Montgomery County
Combined Health District was dependent upon outside funding.  The
current budget provides for a staff of approximately 30 and a total
budget of approximately three-quarters of a million dollars.

Compared to the levels recorded to date in the records of air pollution
data compiled over the years, the level of pollution has decreased in
virtually every category since the advent of the District.  Compliance
generally has been achieved without major litigation, although often
hearings before the board were necessary to confirm intent to
enforce the standards.  Perhaps one of the most innovative and
unique efforts within the Regional Air Pollution Control Agency is an
unusual combination of law enforcement and ecology that has resulted
in an environmental patrol program.  The overall strategy of the
program has been to teach policemen  to become environmentalists.
Experienced police officers with an interest in ecology are trained to
deal with violations of the "environment."  Wearing green uniforms
with an ecology patch on one sleeve and a gun on one hip, the
environmental policemen patrol several neighboring counties watching
out for flagrant environmental violations such as illegal dumping or
potential health hazards such as rabid dogs.  They issue citations similar
to parking tickets that warn the abuser to correct the violation
within five days or else appear in court.
REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSIONS

The Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission (MVRPC) consists of
five counties and 31 municipalities in the Dayton metropolitan area.
These jurisdictions represent 97 percent of the regional population.
Each county appoints two members to the Commission and each municipality
appoints one.  These members are predominantly elected officials.

Funds to operate MVRPC come from membership assessments, local money
for special projects, and federal grants.  Membership fees are
assessed at a rate of 15 cents per capita (counties pay for unincor-
porated areas only).  A few special projects for local agencies
are funded separately.  The balance of the budget has been derived
from federal grants, primarily the HUD "701  Program."

In general, the goal of the Commission is to serve as a vehicle for
coordinating policies and plans throughout the regional area.
MVRPC's concern for the quality of the environment dates back to
a "State of the Region Report" in 1966, where the problems of air
and water pollution were summarized and the future impact projected.
                               241

-------
The Commission's role in environmental management includes chiefly
the following efforts:  technical assistance, planning, A-95
review, and promotion of public participation.  Planning efforts have
included the development of a regional open space plan, water and
sewer plan, bikeway plan, as well as other examples.

In the area of technical assistance, MVRPC maintains a small environ-
mental staff available to member governments and their citizens.
A report was prepared inventorying the natural resources in the region,
forming the technical base for the consideration of other environ-
mental programs.  A status report on environmental quality critically
evaluated programs in the region and recommended actions to be taken.
Also, assistance has been provided for the preparation of environ-
mental impact statements.

MVRPC provides the A-95 review for federal projects in the region
and a similar review for state projects.  The primary purpose of this
review is to ensure that state or federally funded programs in the
region correspond to regional planning efforts.  The review carries
with  it the sanction of withdrawing approval for projects, and this
was used in the case of two small municipalities only a few miles
apart that planned to construct separate sewage treatment facilities.

Finally, in the area of promotion of citizen participation, the
Commission has provided staff resources to assist citizen groups and
developed an aggressive public information program.

In addition to these services, the regional planning commission
provides a non-threatening forum for the discussion of issues on
a regional basis and as such encourages cooperative regional solutions
to problems.
COUNCIL  OF GOVERNMENTS

In the North Carolina field study, the Piedmont Triad Council of
Governments (PTCOG) also had actively participated in local environ-
mental management.  First, PTCOG added an environmental planner to
their staff.   Second, it has participated in reviewing and commenting
on environmental  impact statements through the A-95 process.  Third,
PTCOG has provided some technical assistance to Winston-Salem and
Forsyth  County  in developing an administrative process for local
environmental impact assessment.  Finally, PTCOG created the Regional
Piedmont Triad Committee on Environmental Affairs (RPTCEA) consisting
of forty individuals from the community.  Plagued by a problem of
integrating the diverse task force reports, however, the RPTCEA was
abolished.

In the Dallas-Ft. Worth area, the North Central Texas Council of Govern-
ments (NCTCOG) has played an active role  in environmental management.
Besides  the normal role of regional planning and participation
in the A-95 process, NCTCOG contracted for a plan of a comprehensive

-------
sewerage system for their ten county area.  The study area, however,
extended beyond the boundaries of NCTCOG and focused upon the Upper
Trinity River Basin which included portions of an additional  11
counties.  The area of the study covered 11,000 miles and 2.7 million
population.

Six joint systems are to be established and operational relationships
stipulated through the North Central Texas Regional Water Quality
Compact; they would be drafted by officials of the affected cities and
the joint systems operators.  The proposed compact spells out the
duties and responsibilities of the various levels of government.

One innovative organizational aspect is the formation of a Water
Development Council which would provide overall guidance and direction
for the Regional Sewerage Plan.  The 21 member Council  is to be
composed of 6 representatives from the two Dallas systems (3 selected
by the operators, and 3 nominated by the System Customer Council with
confirmation of the system operator), k from the Ft. Worth system
(2 operators and 2 customers), 4 from the Trinity River Authority
systems (2 operators and 2 customers), 3 from the other systems (1
operator and 2 customers); these 17 members plus 4 from the region
at-large would be appointed by the Executive Board of NCTCOG.  The
creation of this council, by giving continuing opportunity to the
participating jurisdictions to influence decisions, substantially
contributed to the success of the project.
SPECIAL DISTRICTS

During the course of the field studies, two special districts
created by states were analyzed, the Miami (Ohio)  Conservancy District
and the Trinity River Authority in Texas.  This section examines
the Ohio example, and also the Regional Anti-Pollution Authority
in the Coachella Valley in California, which was  voluntarily created
by local municipalities.

In response to the destructive flood of 1913, the Ohio legislature
passed the Ohio Conservancy Act creating the Miami  Conservancy
District (MCD) as a subdivision of the state.  The MCD has the power
to levy assessments; borrow money; condemn land to provide flood
protection; and plan, construct and maintain structures.   The
Conservancy District does not have the power to enforce regulations
or to prosecute violators; state and local enforcement agencies
perform those functions.  The District's area of  concern  is defined
by the geographical watershed of the streams and  rivers involved.
Responsibility for the District is in the hands of the Conservancy
Court, which is made up of nine common pleas judges;  one  each from
the Ohio counties included.  A three-man board of directors is
appointed by the Court to supervise the development and execution
of the District's activities and responsibilities.   These men appoint
an operating staff for day-to-day management.

-------
Originally, the Conservancy District had responsibility only for
flood control.  The flood control plan they developed provides
protection from a storm 40 percent greater than the 1913 storm.
However, MCD broadened its scope when it became directly involved
In water quality after passage of the National Water Quality Act
in 1965.  A committee was formed under the sponsorship of the Dayton
Chamber of Commerce representing all permit holders (including
industries, counties and municipalities) as an act of resistance
to the standards proposed for the Miami  River.  The District served
in a technical advisory capacity to this committee.  In 196? the
Conservancy District was charged by the State of Ohio with responsibility
for planning developing and guiding an effective program for improving
water quality in the District's watershed.  The work to date has
been financed mainly by six counties and 53 industries and municipalities
holding Ohio permits to discharge wastes into the Great Miami River
and its tributaries.  In addition, substantial federal funds were
provided by a grant from the Federal Water Quality Administration.
A three year study resulted in the following programs:  water quality
management, stream appearance, in-stream aeration, low flow augmenta-
tion, regional treatment of non-aqueous wastes, and, regional
wastewater treatment.  Other tasks in the water quality area that
the District is undertaking are building and operating two additional
regional treatment plants and studying landfill contamination
of ground water and the movement of pollution in aquifers.

Money to operate District programs comes from three sources:   (1) flood
control funds are obtained from a property tax collected for the
District by the County Auditors; (2) water quality programs are funded
by fees charged the discharge permit holders; and  (3) wastewater
treatment costs, e.g., the Franklin plant, are charged to the users
through the City of Franklin.

The Conservancy District is an important example for the region
because of the pattern of intergovernmental cooperation it has been
setting for nearly sixty years.  The District's intent has been to
restrict itself to the field of water management,  to avoid duplication
of efforts, and to act as a service agency or resource for businesses
and governments.

A unique approach to the formation of a special district has been
undertaken by four cities in Cal ifornia—Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells,
Indio and Palm Springs.  The threat of an oil refinery In a nearby
mountain pass brought the cities together  in a joint powers agreement
to create the Regional Anti-Pollution Authority (RAPA).  This
voluntarily-formed special district is governed by a board of directors
made up of two representatives from each city.  A  budget was prepared
and a formula for a voluntary assessment based on  assessed valuation
and population agreed upon.   In  1971-72, RAPA had  a $55,655 budget
supporting a total staff of three.

-------
Among the additional activities the Authority has undertaken are:
testimony on state legislation, analysis of local environmental
regulations, citizen seminars on pollution, review of environmental
impact statements, and public information.   RAPA has been actively
concerned with preserving the desert environment, and has promoted
new controls, e.g., regulations on hillside development, aimed at  this
objective.
                              245

-------
SUMMARY

Three aspects of organizing for environmental management were examined
in this section:  (1) local internal organizational structure; (2)
structure for citizen participation; and (3) intergovernmental struc-
ture and approaches.  Based upon the field studies, there seems to be
considerable variety in arrangements utilized by local governments.

In relation to the internal organizational  structure, environmental
responsibilities have traditionally been dispersed throughout several
departments, resulting in problems of coordination.  Local govern-
ments have attempted to alleviate these problems by expanding an
existing agency to include environmental functions, creating a separate
environmental agency, or establishing an administrative committee.  The
principle factors in determining the approach to be adopted include:
(1) which program areas are to be coordinated; (2) which functions are
to be coordinated; and (3) which approach is most consistent with the
organizational climate.  The separate agency seems to promote an
advocate role that may place it in an adversary relation with other
departments.  The desirability of this depends upon the particular
local situation.

One of the most common approaches for receiving citizen participation
is through citizen commissions.  Municipal-sponsored citizen environ-
mental commissions vary on several aspects:  (1) it can be a new board
or an expansion of an existing board; (2) it may be permanent or
temporary;  (3)  it can have a broad purpose or be limited to certain
subject areas;  (*0 it can be advisory or have some authority; (5)
members can be experts or representatives of the community at large;
and,  (6) it can have staff and a budget or have none.   Inglewood,
California, combined several boards responsible for planning and code
appeals into a single board.  Dallas created a temporary committee to
advise the city what its environmental  role should be.  Guilford County
appointed a board of experts to provide technical advice.

Intergovernmental arrangements can be even more diverse in nature.
This chapter discussed two county solid waste disposal contract services,
a multi-county health district air pollution contract service, several
environmental functions of a regional planning commission and a council
of governments, and a state-enacted special purpose river basin  (water
quality -- flood control) district.  While  it  is generally recognized
that "regional" organizations are necessary to address environmental
problems overlapping local boundaries,  there are a number of obstacles
to the success of these efforts.

In reference to the diversity of organizational arrangements, perhaps a
city manager summed  it up best when he  stated:  "How does one organize
to accomplish environmental management  at the city level?  There  is  no
one  right way; what works  is correct."
                                246

-------
 C.   Strategies for Environmental Management
The failure of past local programs to safeguard the environment has
led many local governments to search for better tools or strategies for
coping with environmental problems.  To date, much of the local action
has been an attempt to solve environmental problems once they arise,
either through an enforcement program or provision of pollution control
facilities.  For example, when water pollution became a problem,local
governments acted to provide a sewage treatment plant with capacity
to handle  it.  Or, after flood waters damaged areas in the community,
attempts would be made to dam or channelize the streams.  More
recently, however, the focus of much of local governments' environ-
mental efforts has been to anticipate and prevent such problems from
occurring when possible.  Land use controls, for example, can be
instituted to prevent construction within a flood plain.  And in
the area of water quality standards, municipalities often require
that water entering the sewer system be of a certain quality,
necessitating pretreatment by a manufacturing plant.

The focus of the field studies was on forward-looking strategies with
broad application, rather than on technical solutions to specific
problems.  Consequently, the four cities were examined with respect to
the following programs:  environmental  planning, environmental impact
assessment, and environmental quality standards.

A first step in developing environmental programs is the formulation
of a policy statement on the environment.  While one can question the
utility of such a statement, a well-prepared policy statement can provide
direction for the entire staff of the organization and define some
parameters for the development of future strategies.  To put these
policies into effect, they are almost always adopted by the legislative
body.  This is usually accomplished in  the form of a policy resolution
or as a part of the planning process.

The City of Westminster, California, for example, adopted an environ-
mental policy statement as part of its  comprehensive general plan.
It stated:

      The policy of the citizens and the city government of
      Westminster is to enhance and maintain property to high
      aesthetic standards, minimize adverse environmental impacts
      of urbanization and industrialization, and eliminate dete-
      riorating environmental situations or processes in order
      to achieve a community compatible to wholesome psychological,
      physiological, and sociological growth.
                               247

-------
Similarly, the City of Garland, Texas adopted the following policy
statement:

      The City of Garland will consider the environmental impact
      and associated economic implications of any public or
      private action and will strive to obtain the balance of
      factors providing the optimum community benefit.  Further,
      this city will initiate and encourage actions to insure
      and safeguard a desirable environment.

With a general policy directive for guidance, a subsequent step taken
locally was to insure that environmental concerns were considered by
each city department (or those departments directly involved in
environmental activities).   In Phoenix, Arizona, the City Manager
requested that departments undertake the following efforts:

      1.  Create an awareness of environmental issues among your staff.
      2.  Inventory and document community environmental problems to
          be corrected and resources to be protected.  These can be
          problems resulting from activities of your department or
          that you contact in the performance of your duties.  Determine
          what the city is doing, if this is sufficient and how we
          might  improve the situation.
      3.  Assess the environmental impact of proposed projects,
          programs, ordinances and other activities.  This additional
          criteria should be present where relevant in evaluating
          future proposals.
      4.  If your department has programs directly involved in environ-
          mental issues, develop an appropriate public information
          program.

Most communities are faced with a variety of environmental problems
and responsibilities and as a result need to search out broad strategies
as outlined above to deal with them.   In applying these programs to
other contexts, the following factors should be considered for each
individual community:   (l) the severity of the environmental problem(s);
(2) the type of pollutant; (3) the source of present and potential
pollution; (k) financial  resources; (5) community resources; (6) avail-
able information; and,  (7) staff expertise.  While the strategies
discussed below are flexible enough to be as useful to small juris-
dictions as  large, the  complexities of environmental programs require
considerable analytic capability.  This capability is needed to define
local needs, tailor a package of strategies to these needs, analyze
the  interrelationships  so there are few unintended results, and prepare
for  implementation.  (See  Figure 5   for examples of policy  statements  of
Gar 1 and .)

ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING

Environmental planning, although subject to many definitions and
interpretations,  is used  here to cover  the  consideration of
                               248

-------
FIGURE 5.  EXAMPLES OF POLICY STATEMENTS ADOPTED BY CITY OF GARLAND, TEXAS'
 Area of Concern
 Air quality
Policy
 Sol id waste
 Water quality
 Noise control
 Urban  aesthetics and
 land management
.The quality of air should not adversely
 affect the health of even the most
 sensitive or susceptible groups of the
 populat ion

.Pollutants should not reach concentrations
 that would significantly reduce visi-
 bility, especially visibility reductions
 that would, or could, be a hazard to
 transportat ion

.This city shall  pursue technically and
 financially feasible methods of solid
 waste collection, separation, disposal,
 recycling and recovery which reduce the
 environmental impact of solid waste
 disposal, achieve energy or resource
 recovery, or recycle useful materials.

.This city will pursue the construction
 and operation of pollution free waste-
 water treatment  facilities, thus recycling
 wastewater to a  reusable condition

.The city resolves to initiate programs
 establishing and maintaining reasonable
 levels of noise  tolerance

.A specific objective of this city is to
 insure a commitment, both public and
 private, to a pleasing aesthetic appearance.
 "The policies listed below are only a portion of those adopted by
  the City; each area of concern contained several policy statements and
  only part of them are shown here.

-------
environmental concerns In the comprehensive and land use planning
processes.  The first step in environmental planning,then, is to
determine the particular environmental characteristics of the area.  This
has been called a natural resources inventory, and has been described
most thoroughly by Ian McHarg in Design With Nature.

In 1967 the Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission published a
report of the "Natural Resources of the Miami Valley Region."
The purpose of the report was to identify the natural resources in the
region, analyze associated problems, and make recommendations relative
to managing these resources.   Topics discussed included:  geology
and minerals, soils, water, biological resources (e.g., fish,
wildlife), climate and prec.ipitat ion, flood plain encroachment, water
pollution, air pollution, and policy issues and recommendations for the
proper maintenance and use of resources.  This report served as a
technical base for the consideration of other environmental programs
throughout the region.

In Dallas, when the task of reviewing environmental impact statements
was assigned to the Planning Department, it quickly became evident to
them that they had no environmental data in their plans from which to
estimate the environmental impacts of proposed projects.  The Planning
Department subsequently contracted with a consulting firm for the
Dallas Eco Study.  The purposes of that study were:

      --to identify, quantify, and map the extent and location of
        32 natural resources that are part of the Dallas County
        ecological system
      --to store and display the data on the relative tolerance of
        the ecological systems to human impacts
      --to provide a mechanism for the development of models to
        evaluate the  impact of projects on natural resources.

After getting estimates of $200,000 to $300,000, a consulting firm finally
was found that agreed to do the study for $25,000.  However, the
Planning Department participated in    the data source search and coding,
including interpreting infrared maps, and the computer programming
necessary to display  the data on maps.

The data, for the most part, came from secondary sources including United
States Geological Service maps,  infrared mapping from the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Corps of Engineers, Soil
Conservation Service, Dallas Geological Society, and  local experts.

The following were criteria used in selecting variables:

      --Enable spatial relationship of  information
      --Enable recording of  information for future use  in  impact
        quantification
      --Enable value judgments to be placed upon systems and their
        sub-units
                                250

-------
      --Allow for the up-dating of the stored Information
      --Allow for the analysis of information for multi-purpose
        planning
      --Be feasible from an economic and time standpoint
      --Enable in-house capability for carrying on the planning
        process
      —Enable transfer of programs and methodology for ongoing
        in-house operation
      —Provide the complexity of data appropriate to the level of
        decision-making required.

After a review of possible variables, data was collected on 32
natural resource variables and 3 measures of urbanization.  The
natural resources were part of 5 eco-systems; there were 5 zoological
characteristics (e.g., Pileated Woodpecker habitat, complex wiIdlife
areas), 10 botanical characteristics (e.g., unique botanical areas,
natural and man-made marsh), 14 hydromorphic characteristics
(e.g., flood plains, watersheds), 1 edaphic characteristic (i.e.,
9 soil associations), and 2 geomorphic characteristics (i.e., 7 surface
geology types, and fault lines).  In addition to the individual
variables, maps were also generated from them for 6 eco-systems
(hydromorphic was subdivided into surface and sub-surface), and for
2 broader systems—the biotic (i.e., botanical and zoological)
and abiotic.

The data on these variables were collected for 10,000 grids or cells.
Although this seems large,  it must be noted that the study area
(Dallas County) was 900 square miles.  The result is that each cell
contained 61.8 acres or each cell was 1/3 mile in length.  This
relatively large size was deemed appropriate, considering the scale
of the data source maps and hence the efficiency of delineating and
extracting the data, and the level of decision-making requiring the
data to be collected.  Despite the assurance that quite a few
developments in Dallas exceed 62 acres, it seems that cells of such
a large size limit the utility of the project.

Once the data was collected, interpreted and delineated (i.e., to
fit the grid scale of the study), patterns were extracted (i.e.,
either the predominant pattern for a resource in a cell was noted,
or the proportion of the cell covered by the resource was calculated).
The next step was to code these data:  a numerical code was used on
OCR (Optical Scanner Reader) forms.  (The equipment used for the project
included:  one IBM 370 OS VS1, five IBM 2402 Tape Drives, one IBM
1404 Printer, three IBM 2319 Disc Storage Devices, one IBM 2540 Card
Reader Punch, and one IBM 1287 Optical  Character Scanner.)  The final
step of the process involved producing maps for each of the variables.

In addition to indicating the predominance and location of these
natural resources, a major element of the program was to indicate  the
sensitivity of these resource patterns to human impact.  The consulting
                                251

-------
firm was responsible for the modeling that resulted in these estimates
of tolerance, although judgments for some of the component factors
were often made by the local experts.  These maps of resource tolerance
could then be combined under a variety of conditions or value assumptions.
For instance, a map was produced which could indicate the tolerance of
the area for development or human impact.  A second map merely
showed the areas where there was a multiplicity of ecological sub-
systems rather than their degree of tolerance.   A third map assumed
that the biotic component was twice as important as other components.
They noted that the biotic community was easier to identify and
observe, and therefore could serve as a valuable indicator of the
changes occurring in the ecological environment.  A fourth map
utilized the urbanization data and therefore suggested, when combined
with other data from the study, which areas were suitable for urban
development.

The preparation of the Dal las Eco Study has served many functions;
namely,

      --it increased knowledge and expertise of Planning Department
        personnel on the ecological environment of Dallas
      — it developed skills in environmental management
      — it developed a mechanism which will aid in monitoring the
        environment
      --the output map of the study will aid in general routing
        (i.e., transportation planning) and siting of public facilities,
        as well as provide valuable information in zoning cases
      --it will serve as an educational tool to be used in schools
      — it enlisted community participation.

The flexibility in mapping in the Dallas study makes the inventory
a much more useful tool for decision makers than the published
inventory of MVRPC.  Environmental planning then becomes more than a
statement of environmental problems and long-range policies.  It is
a tool than can provide tailored information relevant to future
activities, e.g., the impact of a proposed new airport.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

As a relatively new strategy for environmental management, environmental
impact assessment is one of the more controversial mechanisms.  Of
all the field study cities, Inglewood was the only one which had
adopted some form of assessment process.

In May 1972, Inglewood established formal requirements for environmental
impact review (EIR).  Then  in February  1973, the Resources Agency of
California  issued its guidelines for the implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act  (CEQA) of 1970.   In April, 1973, the City
Council of  Inglewood amended its own requirements and procedures to
                                252

-------
conform to the state's guidelines (see case study for discussion of
old guidelines).  Prior to the revision of the guidelines in April
1973, H public and 25 private projects were subject to the EIR process.
Of the 11 public projects, 3 or the EIRs had to be changed as a result
of the review process, and 2 of these projects were modified as a
result; no projects were rejected.  Of the 25 private projects subject
to the EIR process, 20 Environmental Clearance Statements were
accepted unconditionally, 3 were accepted conditionally, and 2 were
subject to a full Environmental Impact Study; no projects were rejected.

The procedure as now established requires the Planning and Development
Director (rather than a broader-based Environmental Review Committee
composed of representatives of several departments) to make the
initial decisions whether:  (a) the project or activity is covered
by the CEQ.A or Council ordinance, (b) exempt because the governmental
action is deemed to be either an emergency, or of a ministerial nature,
or (c) categorically exempt.  Ministerial acts include filing of
sub-division maps and issuing building permits--both of which had
been  included in Inglewood's EIR process prior to these revisions.
Projects that are categorically exempt are:  (1)  existing facilities
which are merely being repaired, maintained, or altered slightly
(additional space is limited to 2500 square feet or 50%, whichever
is less); (2) replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and
facilities, with substantially the same purpose and size; (3) new
construction of small structures (e.g., a single family home--
provided no more than two are built—or stores and offices designed for
no more than 20 occupants); (k) minor alterations to land (e.g.,
grading on land with less than 10% slope); (5)  minor alterations in land
use limitations—i.e., minor lot line adjustments and set-back
variances, not zoning changes which are not exempt; (6) accessory
structures (such as small parking lots, on-premise signs, drainage
projects under $10,000).   The last four categories may not be exempt
if the project is in a particularly sensitive environment, or if the
cumulative impact of successive minor changes results in a significant
impact.  Other categorical exemptions include information collection,
regulatory actions for protection of natural resources and for
protection of the environment, inspections, loans, and surplus
government property sales (except land).

If the project is not exempt, the Planning and Development Director
must  then decide whether the project may have possible significant
environmental effects.  If he declares that it will not have such
impact, he issues a Negative Declaration, which is posted and becomes
final after 10 days if it has not been appealed.   In Inglewood, appeals
are heard by the Community Environment Commission (which is a joint
group composed of the Planning and Zoning Board and the Constructions
Appeals Board), after a fee of $50 has been paid; their decision may be
appealed to the City Council within 10 days on payment of a $25 fee.

The Director's decision that a project may have significant impact and
therefore requires an Environmental  Impact Report also is appealable
under the conditions noted above.
                                253

-------
The factors to be considered in making the decision whether a project
may have a significant environmental impact requiring further study
are basically the same as those the Environmental Review Committee
was to use in making the same decision under Inglewood's earlier
guidelines--with the exception that assessing the project's effect
on the need for public services is not specifically mentioned and the
new language only mentions "posing a burden on the existing street
system" in its place.  Reference to impacts on irreplacable cultural,
historical, and recreational sites also was dropped at this decision
point; but it and the impact of the project upon public services must
be included in the full  Environmental  Impact Report, if one is required.
It should also be noted  that the guidelines specifically stated
that the factors to be considered were not to be limited to those
listed.  Further, both primary and secondary consequences of an
action are to be considered (e.g., the consequences upon the environ-
ment of any resulting population growth).

If an EIR is required, the draft (which may be made by the developer)
is circulated to interested departments and is made available to the
public upon request.  Comments are to be made within 30 days, and a
final EIR is to be prepared within an additional 30 days.  The city
then decides whether the project will  or wi11  not have a significant
effect on the environment, and whether or not to approve the project.

An Environmental Impact  Report must include:  (a) the environmental
impact of the proposed action, including primary and secondary impacts
as well as short-term and long-term ones, at each stage--acquisition,
construction, operation--of the project; (b) any adverse environmental
effects which cannot be avoided if the project is implemented; (c)
mitigation measures proposed to minimize the impact; (d) alternatives
to the proposed action (including alternative mitigation measures,
and the option of having no project at all), with the reasons for
rejecting them; (e)  relationship between the short-term use of the
environment and the perspective that each generation is the trustee
of the environment for future generations; (f) any  irreversible
environmental changes if the project were  implemented;  (g) the growth
inducing  impacts of the proposed action; and (h) the boundaries of
the affected area, which actually may be quite far from the proposed
site.

The EIR process has  introduced environmental considerations into the
decision-making process  and has contributed to its rationality and
openness.  The Environmental Impact Review process has proven success-
ful—not  so much because it has killed environmentally damaging projects,
but because it has  introduced environmental considerations into the
decision-making process of both private developers as well as govern-
mental decision-makers.   Its most serious problem may be the inability
to accurately assess the environmental impact of a project, given the
current state of available knowledge.  Other criticisms of the process,
such as its cost, or delay  involved, are minor when compared to the

-------
                                                                   I • >
benefits that can be gained if a project that is potentially harmful
to the environment is blocked.  But the technique requires dedicated
administrators and vigilant citizen participation; the process can
quite easily become a pro forma exercise without these.


ENFORCEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS

A key strategy for environmental management is the development and
enforcement of environmental quality standards.   Generally, specific
ordinances are enacted aimed at the specific pollution problem, e.g.
air, water or noise.   Since the degree of local  authority in each of  these
areas depends upon state enabling legislation, it is difficult to
generalize local  experience.  The level of enforcement effort also
varies greatly between local governments.  Furthermore,  most enforce-
ment programs require a specialized enforcement  staff.
Water

In Greensboro, North Carolina, the city government adopted an ordinance
in January, 1961, that established limitations on waste which it would
accept.  Unacceptable wastes included:

      --any liquid or vapor having a temperature of 150°F
      --any solids such as ashes, sand, mud, etc.
      --any gasoline, flammable or explosive liquids
      --any improperly shredded garbage
      --any waste having a stabilized pH of less than 5.5 or more than 10.0
      --any cyanides
      --any noxious or malodorous gases.

In an amendment, a surcharge was established on those industries and
commercial establishments which contribute excess BOD and suspended solids
in their wastewater discharge.  No maximum limit on concentration was
set forth.  Immediately after the amendments passed, the city sent
a letter to all potentially affected industry, volunteering city
personnel and  laboratories to aid industry in problems of in-plant
control at no charge.  Plants made one of three responses; either they
cleaned up and installed necessary equipment; they cleaned up in
part by eliminating most costly pollution; or, they took no action.

The third alternative occurred most often since it was considered less
expensive to pay the city surcharge.

A sampling schedule was then set up based on the monthly surcharge rate:

      — less $100, twice a year
      --$100 to $500, four times a year
      --over $500, six times a year
                                 255

-------
A minimum of three days is devoted to sampling each plant with an
authentic average used to determine rate.  Due to sampling problems
with restaurants and laundromats, a special fixed unit charge is made.

The advantages to this program are:  (l) the program is self sustaining
financially, (2) industry is kept aware of the problem of wastewater
treatment,  (3)  waste loads are lower, and (4) current information can
be distributed.

The City of Dallas also maintains a water quality program.  While
it has an ordinance controlling wastes discharged into the sewer system,
no continuous monitoring is made and no schedule of effluent charges
exists.  Dallas does spot monitor outfalls into the Trinity River.
However, the City has not brought any suits against violators, but
instead turns to the state for enforcement assistance when voluntary
compliance  is not forthcoming.  Dallas also staffs a biological
assay team  that regularly monitors every stream in the city for  aquatic
life.  It is felt that the health of stream life is the best measure of
pollution.
Air

In each of the field study areas, air pollution was primarily a
state responsibility, with day to day operations delegated to a
subdivision, e.g., special district or county (see the discussion of
the Miami Valley Combined Health District air pollution control program
on page  2kO )•

Although the State similarly is responsible for air pollution control in
Texas, the absence of a vigorous enforcement program has led many local
governments to establish their own programs.  In Dallas, the monitoring
and enforcement program has been relatively low key.  The Air Pollution
Control Section's program of monitoring air pollution at approximately
14 sites has resulted in cleaner air  (e.g., 25% less suspended
particulates) than existed in 1968 when the section began functioning.
The enforcement program included 13 convictions in 1972 with about
25 cases still pending at the beginning of 1973; fines generally were
$100, but compliance with standards was achieved in these cases.  It
is estimated that Dallas industry spent $2.5 million since 1966 for
equipment and an equal amount for maintenance and operation of air
pollution control systems.
 Noise

 In the area of noise pollution, Inglewood has played a leading role.
 In September 1969, the city adopted a 10 point program, which was to
 be carried out,  in part, by a newly created Environmental Standards
 Division.  A Director was hired in November 1969 after a vigorous
 recruitment campaign.
                                256

-------
The 10-point plan called for:

      1.  A series of law suits against Los Angeles for damages on
          behalf of residents and property owners in Inglewood, and
          to compel them to extend their runways thereby permitting
          landing aircraft to be at a higher altitude while over
          Ing1ewood.
      2.  A comprehensive noise ordinance.  Development of the
          ordinance and enforcement of it required a variety of
          monitoring equipment.  The equipment that was purchased
          included a van which contained a microphone, precision sound
          level meter, octave band analyzer, graphic recorder, camera
          equipment,  and tools and other accessories.  Some of this
          equipment was for the City's general noise monitoring program,
          and some of it was aimed at collecting data necessary for
          Inglewood's campaign on aircraft noise.  In addition to this
          portable equipment, there were also k fixed microphones
          on telephone poles in the flight path and a central recording
          station in City Hall to receive the aircraft noise data.  It
          should be noted that a city could begin its program with
          a relatively simple hand-held meter (although it would have
          limited utility for any court cases).

          The noise ordinance that was adopted is similar to the Model
          Noise Ordinance developed by the League of California Cities.
          The ordinance establishes standards which vary according to
          different zones and times.  For instance the assumed base
          ambient noise level for residential areas at night is 45 dbA,
          while it is 55 dbA during the day; this compares to 65 dbA
          for commercial zones during the day.  Any continuous noise
          5 dbA above the ambient level is prohibited; guidelines
          suggested that intermittent noise (less that 5 minutes an
          hour) should not exceed 10 dbA above the ambient, and short
          duration noise (lasting only a few seconds) is limited to
          15 dbA above the ambient for purposes of enforcement.
          A special provision was written for aircraft noise.  Because
          of earlier federal court rulings limiting the power of
          other cities to regulate interstate commerce such as airplane
          flights, the ordinance exempted any planes flying  in
          conformity   with federal air regulations or traffic control
          instructions.  But if a plane was in violation of these
          rules--e.g., flying significantly below the proscribed
          landing approach glide path—it was prohibited from producing
          noise levels above 90 dbA.
      3.  Building codes were to be revised requiring soundproofing
          of all new construction and remodeling.
      4.  Master plan and zoning regulations were to be re-examined
          in order to adjust land use in areas in the aircraft landing
          corridors.
      5.  The city attempted to get Los Angeles to extend its runways
          toward the ocean, thus permitting planes to be at a
          higher altitude while flying over Inglewood.
                                257

-------
      6.  It also tried to get other revisions in the approach
          pattern (e.g., prohibiting turns in the area).
      7.  It urged that approaches to the airport be at a steeper
          angle.
      8.  It urged the airlines to develop quieter (and cleaner)
          engines.
      9.  It devoted a major effort to appearing before FAA, CAB,
          and California Public Utilities Commission proceedings
          affecting noise.
     10.  It helped form a national organization concerned with noise
          abatement—NOI SE (National Organization to Insure a Sound-
          controlled Environment).

The city has sought to use the courts in enforcement processes.  With
the help of special counsel, a suit was filed against the City of Los
Angeles, which owns the Los Angeles International Airport, in the
U.S. District Court in May, 1969.  A nearly identical suit was filed
in the California Superior Court  in October, 19&9.  The main reason
for initiating the backup suit in the state court was that it had a
lower minimum monetary jurisdiction; a plaintiff has to have damages
of $10,000 to sue in federal court, but only $5,000  in the state  court.
The federal court ruled that Inglewood did not have standing to sue.
This decision was appealed to the Court of Appeals which ruled that
Inglewood could sue and remanded  the case back to the lower court
which,  in part, was to determine  as part of the trial whether the
owners had suffered the minimum amount of damages necessary for a
federal suit.

But Inglewood decided to drop its federal suit and press  its case  in
the state court.  The city won the first round when the court rejected
Los Angeles' motion to dismiss the case on the grounds of "multiplicity
of actions"  (i.e., the suit in Federal Court and a separate suit  by a
group of Inglewood residents).  Los Angeles' appeal of this decision is
now under consideration.  In addition, Inglewood's suit in Federal Court
was filed in behalf of residents  and some of these are trying to  have
the Federal suit  re-instated.

This discussion of Inglewood's civil suits clearly indicates one  of
the major weaknesses of this strategy--!.e., it is subject to great
delays, increasing its costs.

Inglewood's criminal case did not fare better.  When the city filed
misdemeanor charges in March 1971 against an airline's pilot for  violating
its noise ordinance, an injunction against enforcement of this part
of the ordinance was issued.
Radiat ion

In Miamisburg, a special program of cooperation exists between the
Mound Laboratory, under AEC contract, and the City.  The Mound Lab
                                 258

-------
Program of Safety and Environmental Control  has evolved coincident with
the dramatic increase in public awareness concerning environmental
issues.  Two events occurred in 1968 which,  in retrospect, appear to
have been significant in establishing the present open and cooperative
climate in which the program is conducted.  In that year, a Miamisburg
City Councilman read a series of newspaper accounts of a report of
two researchers who claimed that current AEC standards for human
radiation tolerance were too high and should be lowered to prevent
potential long-range genetic and other environmental effects.  The
Councilman, through the city staff, initiated a series of discussions
with the Mound Lab concerning the impact of  this report upon the citizens
of Miamisburg and the surrounding communities.  Simultaneously,
the Atomic Energy Commission, under considerable environmental  pressure,
became persuaded that more openness was needed in its communication
with the public concerning the environmental impact of its contract
facilities and licensed radiation sources.  Apparently the effect
of these events had a major impact on the public posture of Mound Lab
with respect to its environmental control program.

Subsequent to 1968, Mound Lab renewed its emphasis on environmental
control and safety by internal reorganization which gave top
priority to the matters of employee  safety; containment of pollution
at the source; and on-site and off-site monitoring systems.  The
basic  intent of the control program is to prevent at the source any
radiation leaks or safety hazards both to the community and to employees
within the plant. The monitoring program  is  set at various levels of
"triggering" to assure that any leakage would be discovered well before
reaching critical exposure levels.

The monitoring program is designed around the standards developed
by the Federal and state governments to control pollution.  AEC
regulations on radiation protection are based principally on the
Radioactivity Concentration Guide (RCG)  levels recommended by the
Office of Radiation Programs of the Environmental Protection Agency.
The levels represent limits in the concentration of radioactivity
for each specific type of radioactive material that should not be
exceeded.  All effluents leaving the laboratory are analyzed for
pollutants.  Samples taken on and off-site are reviewed for radio-
activity in the basic elements man contacts, e.g., air, water, soil,
and foodstuffs.  Mound has two treatment plants that process all
liquid wastes before they are discharged  into the Miami River.   In
addition to two on-site water sampling stations which operate con-
tinuously, there are five water sampling  locations along a seven mile
stretch of the river.  The effluent is analyzed for three radio-active
materials (polonium, plutonium, and tritium) as well as 29 different
water quality parameters listed by the Environmental Protection
Agency.

The Lab  also monitors air quality, beginning with stack emissions.
The off-site air sampling survey covers an area of some 1,250
square miles.  The samples are collected three times a week in each
                                259

-------
of the 21 off-site air sampling stations.  These facilities were
then turned over to the Montgomery County Combined Health Department
for operating as an air monitoring system.  The Monsanto/Mound
facility shares in the data in all 21 such stations.  Thus, everyone
believes that they are Health Department facilities, with the end
result being an excellent program within which the Mound Laboratory,
through cooperation with a public regional agency, gains needed
information without public alarm by minimizing the physical presence
of its monitoring activities.
                               260

-------
SUMMARY

Several strategies for environmental arrangement are available to local
governments.  However, it was not possible to investigate them all in
the four field studies.  This chapter, therefore, reviewed three major
strategies:  natural systems inventory, environmental impact assess-
ment, and environmental quality standards.

The natural systems inventory is seen as an important step in local
environmental planning.  The inventory can take the form of a planning
report, as  in the case of the Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission,
or a computor-based information program, as in Dallas.  The Dallas
experience  indicates that such a program can be undertaken at minimal
cost.

The discussion of environmental impact assessment was based on the
experience of Inglewood, California.  The Inglewood process, entitled
total  impact analysis, includes consideration of economic and social
impact as well as environmental.  The procedures followed are explained
in some detail.   While the impact assessment is regarded as successful
in terms of introducing environmental considerations into the decision
making process of public officials and private developers, it is
criticized for the inadequacy of current knowledge, cost and possible
project delays.

Several local programs for the enforcement of environmental quality
standards were discussed.  In Greensboro, North Carolina, and Dallas,
water quality was examined.  Greensboro has established wastewater
standards with a system of surcharges for violations.  Dallas monitors
outfalls into the Trinity River and also city streams.

The air pollution control program in Dallas is somewhat unique because
the State has the primary legal responsibility for air pollution control
in Texas.  They maintain a small staff for monitoring and enforcement,
although emphasis is a voluntary compliance.

A vigorous noise control program was found in Inglewood.  Their noise
program includes a comprehensive noise ordinance, monitoring, revised
building codes,  and initiation of legal suits.

The city's effectiveness in noise control has been somewhat limited  in
the case of the aircraft noise from Los Angeles International Airport,
although legal cases are still  pending.

The final example of radiation control in Miamisburg, Ohio, is important
for two reasons:  (1)  it is an area of emerging interest, and (2)  it
demonstrates a federal, local,  private cooperative relationship.
                               261

-------
Perhaps the key point to be made by these examples of local  strategies
is that they are now being successfully carried out and at a cost that
is not prohibitive to most local governments.   In many respects,
however, the programs are experimental  in the sense that there still
needs to be greater technical  input and better program evaluation.
                                262

-------
                            APPENDIX 1

        CRITICAL VARIABLES AND RELATED RESEARCH QUESTIONS


1.   The General Condition of the Environment (Living and Physical).

     How did the environmental issues come to attention of the
     local government?

     How did local governmental officials know there was an
     environmental problem?

     Was there an environmental crisis near or in the jurisdiction
     of the local government?  If so, what type of problem?  How
     long did it last?  What was the public reaction to the problem?
     What was the government's reaction to the problem?

     Does the local  government monitor the quality of the environ-
     ment?  If so, how?

     Is there in existence an environmental inventory?

2.   Attitudes and Opinions of the Community toward the Environment

     What is the attitude of local administrators toward the environ-
     ment?

     What is the attitude of local elected officials toward the
     envi ronment?

     What is the attitude of the news media (editorials and news coverage
     toward the environment?

     What is the attitude of the citizenry toward the environment?

     How have these  attitudes been manifested into action?

3.   Political  and Legal Context of the Local Government

     What are the major environmental issues facing local policy
     makers?

     How have the voters behaved in past elections on environ-
     mental  issues?
                               263

-------
     How heavily have candidates for public office campaigned on environ-
     mental  issues?

     What were the results of the election?

     What past issues have involved environmental  matters?  How did they
     get into the political arena?  How were the issues resolved?

     What interest and citizen groups have been active in environmental
     issues?  What were their goals?  What political  strategies did they
     use?  Who belongs to the group?  How are their leaders?  What issues
     are they active on?

     What are the constitutional limitations on the powers of the local
     government?

     What type of governmental structure does the  local  body have?

     Who are the elected officials?

     Who are the chief administrative personnel?  What are their back-
     grounds and experiences, particularly in environmental management?

     What is the relationship between the local government being studied
     and other governmental bodies both local and  state?

4.   Environmental Policy

     What environmental policy (ies) have been adopted by the local govern-
     ment?

     What was the process for adoption?

     What opposition to the policy existed?

     How is the environmental policy being implemented?

     What is the relationship between local environmental policies and
     state policies and requirement?  and between  local environmental policies
     and Federal policies and requirements?

     Who wrote the policy?  Were there general guidelines?

5.   Administrative Organization for the Environment

     In general, how is the  local government organized?  How does the
     environmental program fit  in?

     What is the budget for environmental programs?  How does this compare
     to the overall  local  government budget?  How much aid does the  local govern-
                                264

-------
ment receive from the state and the Federal government?  What is
the process for obtaining the financial aid?  How do environmental
programs fit into the capital budget?

What organizational changes have been made to improve local
environmental management?

Has a citizen advisory board or commission been created?  If so,

     How was it established?
     Who serves on the commission?  What is their background?  How
       are they appointed?  What is their primary responsibility?
     What is the function of the commission?
     What is the financial cost?
     What problems exist  in implementation?
     What suggestions for improvements can be made?
     How does it relate to other boards and commissions?

Has an individual been designated as head of the environmental
programs:  If so,

     Who is this person?  What is his background?
     What are the job requirements?
     What are his primary functions?
     How does he relate to other administrators and departments?

Has an administrative committee been created?  If so,

     Who is a member of the committee?
     What is their primary responsibility?
     How often do they meet?
     Who is chairman of the committee?

Has an environmental department or agency been created?

     How was it established?  Who established it?
     Who are the employees of the department?  What are the backgrounds
       of the personnel in the department?  What training have they
       had in environmental  management?  What are the current responsi-
       bilities and functions?
     What programs do they have responsibility for?
     How are the programs being implemented?
     What criteria would they use to evaluate their effectiveness?
     How effective are the programs?
     What problems (administrative and political) have they encountered?
     What alternative administrative structure could be suggested?
     What relationship exists between this department and other
       departments, particularly planning and public works?
     What is the role of the chief administrative officer in local
       environmental management?
     How are the various programs coordinated?
                          265

-------
6.    Strategies for Local  Environmental Management - Environmental
     Impact Statements, Environmental  Quality Standards and their
     Enforcement, Economic Incentives  and Penalties, Land Use Controls
     and Planning, Court Cases, Moratoriums, etc.   For each strategy,
     the following set of  questions will be used:

          How was the strategy developed?  Who developed it?
          How was approval secured?  What political  problems occurred?
          How is the strategy being implemented?  Who has primary re-
            sponsibi1ity?
          How much does the strategy cost?
          What are the procedures?
          What personnel resources are being expended?  Who are the
            personnel?  What training  and background do they have?
          What criteria are presently  being used to evaluate the
            strategy?
          How effective is the strategy in improving environmental
            quality?
          What suggestion  can be made  for improvements?

7-    Intergovernmental Relations in Environmental  Management

     What regional arrangement exists  in environmental management?

          How was this arrangement created?
          What is the role of the local government being studied?
          How is it financed?
          What are its responsibility and functions?
          Who are its employees?
          How successful has the arrangement been?
          What problems have been encountered?
          What suggestions can be made?

     What state programs does the local government participate in?

          What is the relationship between governmental bodies?
          What is the financial arrangement?
          What problems exist?
          How can these problems be overcome?

     What Federal programs does the local government participate in?

          What is the specific relationship between governmental bodies?
          What is the financial relationship?
          What problems exist?
          How can these problems be overcome?

     What is the relationship between the local government and the U.S. EPA?
                               266

-------
                           APPENDIX 2

            REPORT ON THE FIELD TRIP TO DALLAS, TEXAS
 Introduct ion

The City of Dallas has experienced rapid growth between I960 and 1970
with its population increasing nearly 25% to total 850,000.  The
land area for Dallas also increased by ]6% during those ten years to
295 square miles.  To the untrained observer, Dallas even with its
tremendous growth, gives the impression of wide open spaces.  This
feeling of space, combined with a belief in growth and the free
enterprise system, leads many citizens to feel that there are no
environmental problems in Dallas.  But Dallas' environmental problems
are keeping pace with its growth.

Located near the center of northeast Texas, Dallas is on the western
edge of the Gulf Coastal Plain.  The prairie basin is drained entirely
by the Trinity River and its tributaries.  The Trinity River is
considered to have a "relatively low" pollution level in comparison
to rivers in other cities like Houston and Cleveland.  The major causes
of water pollution in the Trinity are oil and grease from city streets,
service stations, and oil disposed of by citizens after lubricating
their automobiles; and phosphates from detergents and fertilizers.
In fact, water pollution experts have pointed out that during the summer
months, the Trinity River is 90-95? treated effluent.  Like many other
cities, Dallas periodically experiences atmospheric conditions known
as a temperature inversion.   These inversions are associated with poor
atmospheric diffusion conditions with the cycle of inversion and non-
inversion conditions drastically affecting the air pollution problem.
The principal result of the inversion is to inhibit vertical motions
of the atmosphere.  Air pollution experts note Dallas' location in a
basin with walls of only 300-500 feet or 1000 feet if adjoining
counties are added.  This basin increases the air pollution problems
associated with inversions.   From another point of view, Dallas is
thought of as a "wel1-ventilated city"due to wind speed averaging about
10 mph.  Dust particle concentration measurements in Dallas show that
the pollution level increases during the work week in spite of the winds.
It is quite evident that the amount of ventilation is far from sufficient
from the pollution standpoint.   Noise pollution in many parts of the
city is a serious problem, particularly in those areas under the take
off and landing patterns around Love Field.  Another source of noise
pollution is highways with inadequate noise buffers.  In terms of
land use patterns, there is  insufficient open space in many areas to
buffer incompatible land uses.

The City of Dallas has recognized its environmental  problems and has
undertaken a variety of strategies to improve environmental quality,
includ ing:
                               267

-------
      --an ordinance re discharging industrial wastes (see Addendum a.)
      —development of a Water Reclamation Research Center for
        conducting research in waste water treatment
      —cataloging all major portions of the sanitary sewer system
        and the preparation of a computer model of the sewer system
        to include a quantity of flow and number of new customers
        in each drainage area
      —a ban on all open burning of refuse
      —a system of sanitary landfills for solid waste disposal
      --development of a plan for separation and recycling of solid
        wastes
      — research on pollution resistent plants
      --civic sponsored beautification program
      --completion of the Dallas-Ft. Worth Transportation Study and
        Regional Public Transportation Study.
      --a federally-funded Urban Corridor Demonstration Program
        designed to produce significant gains in the elimination of
        traffic congestion on freeways and streets by giving
        preferred treatment to buses.
      —revision of subdivision regulations to reflect considerations
        of design and environment.
      —creation of a temporary citizens' advisory committee to assess
        environmental conditions.

Since it would be impossible to analyze all organizational changes
and environmental management programs, only the following aspects are
discussed in this report.  Three organizational innovations have
been identified:

      —the Committee on Environmental duality as a temporary citizen
        advisory body
      —the Trinity River Authority as a state-created, regional body
        responsible for the environmental quality of the Trinity River
        Basin
      —a report completed under the North Central Texas Council of
        Governments recommending a Comprehensive Sewerage Plan for the
        Upper Trinity River Basin

In terms of environmental management programs, three strategies are
analyzed:

      --the Ecological Study which was an inventory of present
        environmental conditions, both physical and social  in Dallas
        County
      --programs in environment quality standards and their enforcement,
        concentrating on air and water standards
      —the Water Reclamation Research Center, using both municipal
        and federal funding,  in doing a research project on waste water
        treatment and possible recycling
                               268

-------
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

The involvement of citizens in environmental affairs at the local
level through the creation of an advisory committee may or may not
serve any purpose beyond "window dressing."  However, a number of
worthwhile purposes are possible:

      —to bring additional expertise to decision makers, with
        selection of committee members based on technical skills or
        knowledge
      --to call public attention to an environmentally related problem
        and generate support for governmental actions.  Consequently,
        committee members might be selected for being an environmental
        proponent or for investigative skills.
      --to make preliminary decisions which are reviewed by elected
        officials or determining community goals and priorities, with
        selection of committee members based on representativeness of
        the community.

These are not exclusive functions; for instance, an advisory committee
may accomplish all of these objectives and have its membership selected
on the basis of all of these criteria.  In Dallas, the Committee on
Environmental Quality was selected primarily with considerations of
representativeness in mind rather than technical expertise or investi-
gative skills, or resources (such as time), or dedication to the
environmental cause.

During the Spring 197' campaigns mayoral candidate Wes Wise, pitted
against the choice of the usually victorious Citizen Charter Association,
ran on a platform which considered the environmental issue second only
to law and order.  After Mr. Wise's victory, he followed through with his
concern for the environment.  On July 26, 1971 he appointed a 3-man Council
committee to study the feasibility of creating a City Environmental Quality
Board, with the suggestions that it have approximately 8 members--
including 1 high school and 1  college student (his campaign had urged
greater participation In government by young people), at least 2 from
industry, and the remainder from the general public—and that it be
"strictly an advisory one."

After receiving assistance from the City Manager's office, on September 13,
1971  this study committee reported its recommendations.  It supported the
establishment of a 15-member committee with the membership being "drawn
from those in the city with useful knowledge and expertise, e.g.,
Architects, Planners, Landscape Architects, Engineers, Medical Societies,
Home Builders, Real Estate, Professionals, Industry, Environmental
Organizations, League of Women Voters, A.A.U.W., High School Students,
College Students."  The members' term of office would cease on June 1,
1972 upon completion  of their report.  The Committee would have had
eight and one-half months if the Council acted promptly on the recom-
mendations of the City Manager's staff, which would serve as their staff.
The scope of their work was broad in that the Committee was to develop
and submit "a recommended city-wide environmental  policy with consideration
                               269

-------
 of the specific categories and concern of water  (pollution   and  thermal
 condition)  quality, air pollution (including dust,  odor and equipment
 emissions), noise pollution,  visual  pollution, open space,  land  use,
 population, solid waste pollution."   The report  continued,

"The pursuit of this assignment would involve the following:

       1.   Assessment or environmental preservation  action and  improve-
           ments accomplished  or in progress.
       2.   Identification of instances where environmental improvements
           could be made.
       3.   Inventory and documentation of community  environmental  prob-
           lems, ranking them  in order of severity of effects on
           residents.
       4.   Identification of needs for:
           a)  research, experimentation and expanded special environ-
              mental projects;
           b)  planning strategies;
           c)  programs for public Information
       5.   Definition of an appropriate city role in the solution of
           environmental problems.
       6.   Submission of recommendations for new  and additional ordinances
           and regulations for environmental improvements.
       7.   Development of recommended changes in  city procedures, programs,
           or  activities that  contribute to our environmental problem.
       8.   Suggestions as to means of creating an awareness  of  environ-
           mental problems throughout the community, and lastly,
       9.   Identification of opportunities for community cooperation,
           inter-agency cooperation and intergovernmental  cooperation
           in  programs to improve the environment."

 In addition,  the Council committee noted it was  prepared to offer a
 resolution to accomplish this and to nominate the 15 members of  the
 committee.

 On September  27, 1971 the Council passed an ordinance virtually
 identical to the recommendation.  But the resolution was not imple-
 mented - i.e., the appointments were not made.   On  January 3,  1972 the
 Council passed a new ordinance repealing the earlier one, adding a
 10th objective:  "Such other  related matters that the Committee  deems
 of benefit to the City Council in attacking the  environmental  problem
 of the City," giving  it a 6-month life from the  date of swearing in
 of a majority of the Committee, and  increasing  its  size to 17
 (including a  Chairman and Vice-chairman). See Addendum b .   On March  1,
 1972 thirteen of the members  were sworn in, and  the Committee  was
 ready to function.

 The delay between  the creation of the City Council's committee to
 study the feasibility of a Committee on Environmental Quality  and
 the swearing  in of  this citizen advisory group was  more than seven
 months.  Speculation about the delay centered on the difficulties
 involved in agreeing on the appointees, although other causes  may
                                270

-------
have contributed, such as  the press of higher-priority matters.  The
size escalated from Mayor  Wise's suggestion of 8, to the City Council
committee's suggestion of  15,to the final selection of 17.  One source
speculated that the delay  came, in part, from the Council's desire to
"avoid conflict.  Extensive negotiation occurred over the appointment
of the only black as Committee Vice-Chairman; when the initial choice
declined to serve because  of the press of his other activities, there
was some delay until a second black man could be named as his substitute
as Vice-Chairman.  The political sensitivity of the task of naming
the Committee may also be  seen in the fact that only 5 or 6 of the
30-ifO names suggested by the Planning Department were eventually
appointed.*

Additional speculation about the delay suggested that the Planning
Department staff, which served as the staff for the Committee, was  busy
with other activities and  so the entire project was delayed.  It
is interesting to note, however, that the Committee received a 52-page
staff report from them entitled, "Environmental Issues in Dallas:  A
Preliminary Report," dated October 1971, suggesting that an earlier
start for the Committee was anticipated.  This report included a
description of current environmental conditions in Dallas, a statement
on existing legal tools, a description of the relevant public agencies
that might be helpful to the committee, a brief list of the most
active environmental groups, and an outline of the significant problems
the committee might examine.  Appendices included a description of the
physical landscape; a summary of relevant local, state, and federal
laws in the environmental  field; a list of names and addresses of city,
county, regional, state, and federal agencies with environmental
responsibilities; a list of 59 local organizations concerned with
environment; and finally a list of environmental experts at local
and nearby universities.

The composition of the Initial Committee could be classified in a
number of ways.  Classifying them by environmental advocacy, one source
who was interviewed during our field visit felt that only four members
could be considered environmentalists (i.e., had played an active
role in environmental organizations or had publicly expressed strong
environmental  views).  If  classified according to "minority" status,
four were women, one was black, one was Chicano, and eleven were
white males.  According to occupation, two were students, two were
associated with Universities, two were housewives, two were in the
construction or building industry, one was a small businessman, and
eight were professionals such as engineers,  lawyers, physician, CPA,
architect.
*The low proportion of Planning Department "nominees" selected may be
 interpreted as a sign that staff does not dominate the Council rather
 than a sign of the political sensitivity of the task.
                               271

-------
Since the Committee was sworn in March 1, 1972, it was supposed to go out
of existence on September 1, 1972.  But in August 1972, the Committee
requested an extension of its term, and the Council  agreed, setting
June 30, 1973 as the deadline the Committee was to conclude its mission.

The Committee, despite its limited tenure under the enabling legislation,
began slowly.  This might have been expected considering its broad
focus and its diverse membership which purposely contained both
environmentalists and representatives of the business interests.   The
leadership style of the chairman, which stressed consensus, may also
have contributed to the slow start.

With the assistance of the 3 staff members from the Department of
Planning and Urban Development, the Committee distributed a questionnaire
to the various departments involved in the environment which asked them for
their:  1) accomplishments to date, 2) possible future improvements,
3) list of environmental problems, k) needs for research, 5) planning
strategies, 6) public information needs, and 7) general comments.
They also began receiving oral testimony from various department
heads.

The replies of the departments indicated a broad range of perceptions
on the city's environmental problems.  There appeared to be a general
consensus among the respondents that their own department had accomplished
a great deal and did not need any additional help.  This contributed
to a distrust of the information supplied by the city staff.  A
number of the Committee members felt the departments were giving
"biased" responses in that they were self-protective as well as lacking
criticism of other departments.  There was some reported resistance from
departments with some distrust for the role of the Planning Department
in this project.

The Committee also solicited the views of environmental activists  in
Dallas as well as regional, State, and Federal agencies familiar with
the city's problems.  They also sought information from 19 other cities
in the nation that they knew had utilized citizen environmental commissions.
The quantity and quality of the responses varied.  For example, only
^8 of the 200-300 questionnaires to local groups were returned and
these varied from very general comments to some very detailed responses.

As part of their efforts to become informed, two public hearings were
held.  The first was an afternoon meeting and the second  (held a week
later) was an evening meeting.  Speakers were limited to a five-minute
oral presentation before questioning, but no limit was placed on
the length of any written statements.  The focus of the presentations
was on the major environmental problems of Dallas, and potential
solutions to them.  Participation was low - only eleven appeared at the
first meeting and twenty-one at the second.  It  is not clear whether
this reflected contentment with the environment  in Dallas, or merely
a  lack of organized interest  in the environment, suspicion of citizen
advisory groups, or poor organizational effort by the Committee  (i.e.,
publicity, timing, and  location of the hearings - e.g., one suggestion
                               272

-------
made subsequently by a Committee member was to hold the hearings in the
neighborhoods as the Planning Department has done on its Comprehensive
Plan Development rather than a single central location).

The Committee is currently in its final phase - preparing its report
for the City Council which was due June 30, 1973-  A complete evaluation
of the Committee cannot be made until the report has been made and
reviewed by the Council.

Several alternative paths were suggested by the participants and
observers  interviewed almost a year after the Committee began its work.
It has been noted that the recommended size for the Committee grew
from the Mayor's suggestion of eight, to a City Managers' staff
recommendation of "9, 11, or 15," to the eventual size of 17-  Some
felt a city of Dallas' size needs a still larger committee;  it might
be harder  to manage, but it would provide a greater pool of talent from
which to draw the real workers, as well as enabling a greater division
of labor in the formation of subcommittees.

Some consideration was given to the term of office.  A temporary
committee  scheduled to go out of existence when its report was presented,
was the choice made.  The arguments apparently raised included the amount
of structure already present in the fragmented field of environmental
management, and the cost, but there was also a fear that a permanent
body might be a continuing source of citizen pressure.   Certainly the
originally prescribed six-month term of office was too brief to expect the
fulfillment of the broad charge given to the Committee.

The staff  for the Committee came from the Planning Department.  An
alternate  source would be for the Committee to recruit its own staff.
Although this would be more likely to avoid the distrust of  the staff
that arose in Dallas, it is also very time-consuming and is  likely
to result  in a staff that is not as intimately acquainted with the
machinery  (formal and informal) of the City Hall political process.
Similarly, although an independent staff would eliminate any misper-
ceptions that the group was merely advising a single department rather
than the City Council, the same goal could be accomplished by using
the staff  available to the City Council (i.e., the City Manager's staff).

The Committee's role was a source of concern.  The Committee, at the
outset, seemed to want a role beyond merely recommending goals and
priorities.  They recognized the political reality that how a program
is legislated and administered will have a greater impact on the
environment than a mere statement of policy objectives.  Their fear of
only being window-dressing, and their distrust of staff that emerged from
their early experience may have contributed to it.  The occasional
push from  the Planning Department staff to endorse some of their previous
work (specifically their sign ordinance efforts), and their  own con-
cerns for  the environment (which led them to criticize the Council for
endorsing  the Trinity River project before the EIS for it was released),
as well as a too-human tendency for ego-building may also have con-
tributed to their desire for a broader role.
                               273

-------
TRINITY RIVER AUTHORITY

A unique regional governmental body, the Trinity River Authority, was
created by the State of Texas to govern the development of the Trinity
River Basin.  Today, the Basin includes 17,8^5 square miles of valley
that feed the Trinity River, 6.k% of Texas' land area, 20% of Texas'
population, and 251 of Texas' present economy.  The conservation and
use of the water resources of the Trinity River Basin involve an
effective working partnership between the state's largest metropolitan
areas:  Dallas-Ft.  Worth and Houston.

Efforts to improve the Trinity River Basin go back to the l870's.  In
recent decades, a major step forward occured in 1955, when the Texas
Legislature created the Trinity River Authority of Texas.  The Authority,
known as TRA, was given three principal duties:

      — to master plan the orderly development of the entire Basin's
        soil and water resources.
      —-to provide local participation in federal projects when
        required by the Congress, as in the case of navigation and
        flood control.
      —to provide services to people within the TRA territory.

TRA is a state agency and a political subdivision of State government.
Its territory includes all or part of the 17 counties which are
adjacent to those reaches of the river which will be developed for
navigation.  TRA is governed by a 2^-member Board of Directors appointed
by the Governor with the approval of the Senate.  By law, 3 directors
are from Tarrant County, k from Dallas County, 1 from each of the
other 15 counties, and 2 are appointed at-large.  The directors serve
6-year terms.  Since TRA's creation, the Directors have declined
to accept the compensation and expenses to which they are entitled.

Since Its inception, the Trinity River Authority has been involved
in a variety of activities.  For the purpose of this study, four
projects are analyzed:  the development of a master plan, pollution
control program, the development of a Basin Water Quality Manage-
ment Plan, and the Trinity River Canal Project.  In  1958, the TRA
completed a river basin master plan which was the first of its
kind  in the United States.   It was adopted>after 16 public hearings
held  throughout the Basin,with these basic components:

      --the multiple-purpose channel for navigation, flood control
        and recreation.
      --the construction of 49 major dams resulting  in ^9 major
        lakes for water supply, flood control and recreation.
      --the construction of 5 more floodway and  levee systems,
        which will solve the flood problems in the cities.

The master plan adopted and enlarged upon the  initial soil
conservation program by providing for more rural flood control dams
                               27**

-------
to keep polluting silt out of the river.  The crux of the rural flood
control program is the application of sound soil conservation
practices and land and range management programs to over 8,200,000 acres
of land in the upper Trinity.

The implementation of the major projects is providing many water-
oriented recreational opportunities for the growing populations
of both the Trinity River Basin and the Houston metropolitan area.
These opportuneties include boating, swimming, canoeing, sailing,
camping, picn'cking, or just the quiet enjoyment of beautiful
waterfront landscape made accessible through river improvement
programs.

After adoption of the master plan in 1958, TRA began implementing
the unfinished parts of the plan.  By selling over $113 million
dollars of revenue bonds and by obtaining millions of dollars of
federal funds in the form of construction assistance, grants and
loans, TRA has achieved these results without any local taxes.

A second activity of TRA has been in water pollution control programs.
There are two types of pollution in the Trinity River: 1) algae caused
by the discharge of raw sewage or improperly treated effluent
from sewage treatment plants and other illegally discharged pollutants;
and, 2) silt caused by soil erosion.  Before the creation of federal
and state pollution control agencies, the TRA master plan took aim
at the Trinity's pollution problem and initiated in Texas the
regional sewerage system concept as a positive solution to the
problem in urban areas.  This concept is a workable alternative to
the contamination of these areas by numerous small sewage treatment
plants that are not economically operated nor properly maintained.

TRA's first step forward in cleaning up the Trinity was the Central
Sewerage System, which serves 11 cities.  If this system had not
been built, over *»0 small plants would be scattered throughout this
area and the river would be more polluted than it is.  Today this
one plant Is treating the sewage of those 11 cities and discharging
into the Trinity an effluent that meets the State's minimum standards.
Ultimately, it will be expanded to treat the sewage of over a million
people.

TRA's second step forward in cleaning up the Trinity River was the
construction of the Ten Mile Creek System, which now serves five
cities and which will ultimately treat the wastes of over 350,000
people.  When this system became operational, seven small substandard
plants were eliminated.  The effluent discharge of this plant is
of better quality than required by the State's minimum standards.

TRA's third step forward in cleaning up the Trinity was the construction
of the Walker-Calloway Branches outfall line project that eliminated
three more small, substandard plants.
                               275

-------
TRA's fourth step forward in keeping the Trinity clean was the
implementation of a septic tank control program along 460 miles of
shoreline at Lake Livingston.  Percolation tests are used to deter-
mine  if  the  land at a given  point  is suitable for the  installation
of a  septic  tank system.

In 1972, TRA initiated a third activity, a basin-wide water quality
management study.  This study, requiring some 18 months, will  be the
basis for a water quality management program which will establish
the machinery for cleaning up the Trinity River and keeping it clean.
This $643,300 effort is being partially funded by the Environmental
Protection Agency at the level of $321,650.  The Texas Water
Quality Board is providing $185,000 and the remaining portion  of the
funds are coming from the Trinity River Authority and other local
sources.  Special recognition should be given to local  contributions
made by the Amon G. Carter Foundation which donated $25,000, the
Hoblitzer Foundation which donated $25,000, and the Trinity Improvement
Association which has contributed $50,000.  Since receipt of grant
funds for the purpose of making this water quality management  plan,
the management has employed  several  staff members whose work  is
solely related to the development of this Basin Plan.  These staff members
are currently engaged in various work activities in connection with
this Plan development.

The Basin Water Quality Management Plan involves the establishment of
the basin water quality goals and the water quality management plan
that will assure the accomplishment of these goals.  A number  of
tasks such as those listed below will provide the basis for this
Plan development.

      1.  Identify the available water resources of the basin.
      2.  Identify the water needs.
      3.  Identify the current and future waste loads.
      k.  Determine water quality standards for assuring various water
          uses.
      5.  Determine the cost-effective plan for satisfying water
          quality standards.
      6.  Recommend implementation schedule for construction of proposed
          facilities.
      7.  Determine cost estimates for recommended pollution abatement
          facilities.
      8.  Develop financial  plan to provide funding needed for imple-
          mentation of pollution abatement facilities.
      9.  Develop jurisdictional plan that will indicate  implementation
          and operation responsibilities.
      10.  Consider the environmental impact of the proposed Water
          Quality Management Plan.

A fourth activity of TRA was the development of a multi-purpose
channel  for  flood control, economic growth, low cost transportation,
recreation,  and preservation of natural areas.  The project plans
                              276

-------
call for the construction of 16 channel dams and 20 locks and the
bypassing of 184 bows and bends to shorten the river's length from
5^8 to 363 miles.  A shorter, straighter river is vital to both
flood control and navigation.

In June 1973, voters in the TRA were asked to approve the issuance of
$150,000,000 of river improvement tax bonds by the Trinity River
Authority and to ratify the power given the authority to levy an
ad valorem tax not to exceed 15$ per $100 of assessed valuation on
property within the boundaries of the Authority, which generally
constitutes the area of 17 counties which lie within the Trinity
River Watershed.

The $150,000,000 of funds from the sale of the bonds were used
to provide the non-federal participation on certain improvements to
the river basin authorized by the Congress in 1965 and for which the
Corps of Engineers since that date has invested approximately $7,619,000
in advance engineering and design work.  President Nixon recommended
the expenditure of an additional $1,086,000 for this work in the coming
fiscal year.  Although these Improvements are expected to be
funded for construction primarily with federal funds, there are
certain requirements for participation by non-federal public interests.
The Trinity River Authority has the responsibility for providing the
non-federal funds required on certain of these improvements, and with
the approaching completion of the advance engineering and design work
the time is at hand for the Authority to take those steps necessary
for providing its share of this financing.  Current cost estimates for
these features are $1,351,100,000 of federal funds and $312,960,000
of non-federal funds.  Of the non-federal funds required, more than
one-half can be funded by the Authority through financing other than
the use of tax supported bonds.  Only $150,000,000 of tax supported
bonds will be required for use by the Authority in meeting the
requirements necessary to implement this program.

However, voters turned down the bonds for environmental reasons, and
thus, at least temporarily,ki1 led  the project.
UPPER TRINITY RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE SEWERAGE PLAN

In January 1969, the North Central Texas Council of Governments
(NCTCOG) contracted for a plan of a comprehensive sewerage system for
their region covering 10 counties.  The study area, however, extended
beyond the boundaries of NCTCOG and focused upon the Upper Trinity
River Basin which included portions of an additional 11 counties.*
The area of the study covered 11,000 square miles which is larger than
several states and its 2.7 million population exceeds that of a number
of states.
"One of these counties has subsequently become a member of NCTCOG.
                               277

-------
The need for a comprehensive sewerage plan for the river basin can
best be demonstrated by pointing out that during the dry period, the
flow in the Upper Trinity River and its tributaries is more than 90%
treated effluent (or discharge) from existing sewage treatment plants.
In many parts of the river BOD (biochemical oxygen demand)  levels
do not meet the standards established by the state and federal
governments.

Basically, the 18-month study recommended a limited consolidation into
6 joint systems and a gradual phasing out of the other kl sewage
treatment plants in Dallas and Tarrant Counties (the latter includes
Ft. Worth) and in portions of 7 other counties.  The 6 systems are
currently in existence or under construction and are operated by 4
entities:  Dallas, Ft. Worth, Trinity River Authority, and  the cities
of Richardson and Garland (the latter to be operated by the North
Texas Municipal Water District).

Eighteen months later (December 1971) another consultant's  report,
recommending a management and finance program for the system,was
submitted and approved by the Executive Board of NCTCOG.  The 6
joint systems would be established and operational relationships
stipulated through the North Central Texas Regional Water Quality
compact which would be drafted by officials of the affected cities and
the joint systems operators.  The compact would spell out the duties
and responsibilities of the various levels of government involved, in-
cluding NCTCOG1s 21 member Water Development Council , and  would
provide overall guidance and direction for the Regional Sewerage
Plan.  The 21 member Council would be composed of 6 representatives
from the two Dallas systems  (3 selected by the operators, and 3
nominated by the System Customer Council with confirmation  of the
system operator) , 4 from the Ft. Worth system  (2 operators  and 2
customers), 3 from the other systems  (1 operator and 2 customers);
these 17 members plus k from the region at-large would be appointed
by the Executive Board of NCTCOG.

Of major  interest to the non-Texas reader may be the organizational
form recommended and the alternative forms considered and rejected by
the consultant firm hired to develop the Management and Finance
Program for the Comprehensive Sewerage Plan.  The report written by
Peat, Marwick, Mitchell and Company and published in December 1971
lists a number of advantages and disadvantages of the various
alternatives, and the remainder of this section is drawn primarily
from that report:  Upper Trinity River Basin Comprehensive Sewerage
Plan:  Management and Finance Program  (Volume 3)-

The 8 organizational forms considered were:

      1.  Private corporation
      2.  Coordinated joint systems
      3.  County system
      A.  Coordinated joint systems with regional finance
      5.  Centralized administration and contract sewerage operations
                               278

-------
      6.  Regional single-purpose authority
      7.  Regional multi-purpose authority
      8.  Regional multi-purpose government

The report lists a number of criteria or value judgments upon which
the alternatives were measured and evaluated.  Several of the criteria
are broad and general enough so that they are of limited utility
in differentiating between the alternative organizational forms —
for example, the first criterion mentioned by the report—or are not
related to the organizational principle but rather to the subsequent
detailed arrangements — such as the sixth or seventh criterion.

The criteria are:

      1.  Assure adherence to federal and state water quality standards
      2.  Facilitate comprehensive planning for water quality and
          provide planning interface with other regional functions
      3.  Respond to the will of the people
      A.  Control the organization locally
      5.  Utilize an existing governmental entity
      6.  Establish a definite purpose and set of objectives
      7-  Assign authority commensurate with responsibility
      8.  Require a minimum of legislative change or action
      9-  Respond to change as appropriate

The analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of each organizational
form was not restricted to this list; nor did it refer to all of
the criteria on the list—only k of these value statements appear
to differentiate the various alternatives (2nd, 3rd, 5th, and
8th:  facilitate comprehensive planning, respond to the will of
the people, utilize existing governmental entities, and require
a minimum of legislative action).

1.  Private corporation.  The major advantage cited by the consultant's
report was that this option represented free enterprise activity,
and in addition it would be free of the financial and personnel
restraints placed on governments (i.e., no debt or bonding limitations,
and no civil service regulations).  Financially, it would mean that
no governmental agency had to be concerned about financing.

But on the other hand, private corporations were unlikely to be able
to raise the large amount of capital  necessary to build the expanded
facilities; in addition, it would have to pay higher costs for the
capital  because of its non-tax exempt financing status.  The most
serious disadvantages, however, appear to be the lack of responsiveness
to the will of the people and the difficulty of coordinating this
private effort with other areas of comprehensive planning.

2.  Coordinated joint systems.  This was the option recommended by
the report.  Its major advantages were that little or no change from
current structural conditions (organizational or financial) were
needed, and that the systems could still operate independently and
                               279

-------
at the will of their respective governing boards (i.e., "no
regional 'super1  government would be required"--nor any additional
entity, for that matter).

In addition, several financial advantages of this organizational
arrangement were noted:  lower interest rates because of their use
of tax-exempt bonds and because they would enjoy higher bond ratings
due to their past history of successful operation.

But the consultants listed several disadvantages.  This organizational
option would require increased coordination since four separate
entities would have the responsibility for operation.  Second,
regional comprehensive planning and development would be inhibited
since compliance would be dependent upon the willingness and cooperation
of the entities.   Third, since there would be four separate operating
entities, the burden of enforcement of water quality standards  (which
would be the responsibility of regional authorities) would be increased.
Fourth, additional legislation would be necessary to absorb or serve
the cities currently served by the kl plants to be phased out, as
well as to  increase the authority of NCTCOG and its Water Development
Council to  implement the plan.

The separate financial structures also created disadvantages.  The
separate entities may have varying needs for capital for expansion,
as well as varying costs to acquire that capital, resulting in rates
for service varying throughout the region.

3-  County systems.  If each county were to operate its own systems,
then no new governmental entity would be required,  and there would
be uniformity of service and rates throughout the county.  In
addition, the county's tax-exempt status and financial strength would
result in lower interest rates.

On the other hand, coordination between the counties and with the
rest of the region would still be needed.  This was reinforced by
the report's comment that drainage basins do not follow county lines.
In addition, the counties lacked the experience of operating large
and complex sewerage systems.  Additional legislation would be needed
to permit the counties to serve areas outside of its jurisdiction.

k.  Coordinated joint systems with regional  financing.  This  organization-
al arrangement involves a regional administrative authority with
policy-making and financial functions supervising contracts with
the current operator of the sewerage systems.  This would have the
advantage of having planning accomplished at the regional level, while
not requiring extensive changes in organization since the current
entities would continue to operate the systems under contract.

The financial disadvantages of the recommended system--!,e. , differing
rates—would be overcome; the outstanding debt acquired could be
prorated to all participants, and cost allocations could be simplified.
                               280

-------
This arrangement still permits the use of lower interest bearing
tax-exempt municipal bonds.  In addition, the regional concept meets
EPA and HUD guidelines for grants to finance construction.  Its
larger size would facilitate use of revenue bonds, and with federal
grants would reduce the need for tax bond considerations with their
referendum requirements and debt 1 imitations--!.e., taxing power
would not be mandatory.  In addition, regional pooling of revenue
would create greater financial flexibility through better investment
opportunities for idle funds as well as facilitating "pay-as-you-go"
financing.  These advantages of regional financing were repeated for
each of the alternatives subsequently described.

But this system did have disadvantages.  The fragmentation associated
with four different operators still  required continual coordination.
New legislation would be needed either to create a new regional
authority, or to expand NCTCOG's authority to include financing.
And a complex system of accounting and reporting might be needed in
order to satisfy the needs of the authority and the separate operating
entities.  Regional bodies usually have less favorable bond ratings
(and hence must pay higher interest rates) because their bond ratings
are dependent upon the bond ratings of the individual cities contract-
ing for services from them, and because they usually lack operating
experience.  This disadvantage associated with the financial structure
of regional organizations was repeated for each of the regional
alternatives subsequently considered by the consultants.

5.  Centralized administration and contract sewerage operations.  The
major advantages listed by the consultant's report for this organization-
al arrangement is that regional planning is made possible, through
the centralized regional authority, and coordination of activities
is made possible through a contract with a single entity for the
operation of the entire system.  The financial advantages of a
regional authority noted above were repeated.

The selection of the single entity to operate the entire system was
cited as a difficult political question and a major disadvantage of
this alternative.  In addition, it was argued, the amount of effort
necessary to coordinate the sewer systems with other regional functions
"could be unjustified and more costly," especially since the regional
authority's control over the sewerage system would be limited by
the terms of the contract.  The use of a contract was also seen as
a limitation upon the ability of the people to influence the operation
of the system.  But the recommended system (coordinated joint systems)
with its appointed Water Development Council  was  not criticized for
any inability of the people to influence the operation of the system.
Another new argument was raised by the report at  this point:  since
one of the existing operators would be awarded the contract for the
entire system, it might serve its own residents better and neglect
outlying regional customers.  The report also listed the need for
legislative changes to broaden the existing regional organization and
the financial disadvantage resulting from the regional authority's
lack of operating experience.
                              281

-------
6.  Regional single-purpose authority.  A regional authority--
whether it was a single-purpose authority (considered here), or
a multi-purpose authority (see 7, below), or a multi-purpose
government  (see 8, below), was viewed as having several advantages.
First, there would be coordinated regional management of the sewerage
system.  Second, there would be improved service to its customers
because of  increased efficiency, uniform handling of service calls,
better control of engineering standards for connecting services, and
tighter control on industrial users.  Although one may argue that
these  improvements are more likely when there is a single operator, it
is interesting to note this advantage was not cited for the single
operating contract discussed above  (i.e., In 5.  "Centralized
administration and contract sewerage operations"), nor is it unlikely
to occur in the recommended system  (I.e., 2.  "Coordinated joint
systems"), where it was not mentioned either.  A single system
was also seen as resulting in decreased administrative costs
(although it was not mentioned as an advantage of a single contractor,
nor as a disadvantage of the recommended system relying on four
separate operating entities).  To remind our reader, the financial
advantages of regionalism noted above were cited here too.

The disadvantages of a single-purpose  regional organization were  seen
as:  the creation of a new governmental entity, the requirement of a new
legislation, and the removal of control from local governmental juris-
dictions.   The financial disadvantage  of  regionalism  in general was
noted  here  too.

7.  Regional multi-purpose authority.   In addition to  the three advantages
of a regional single-purpose authority  noted above, (coordinated  regional
management,  improved service, decreased administrative costs), the
greatest advantage for this organizational  arrangement was that such a
group  already exists in the  region--!.e., the Trinity  River Authority—
and no new  entities or levels of government would be  required.  Financial
advantages  (and disadvantages) of regionalism were noted.

The disadvantages of the alternative were described as follows:  (p.  IV-17)

       The major disadvantages are highlighted  in  that  (l) local
       citizens may feel that they would have little,  if  any. voice  in
       the operation of the system and  (2) no coordination would be
       required with other  regional  functions.  The authority concept
       would utilize an appointed  board  and  serve  customers through
       contracts,  local officials and  citizens might perceive that  the
       authority might  not  be  responsive to  their  requests.

8.  Regional multi-purpose government.  A regional government would  be
able to coordinate sewerage with other governmental functions, while the
accomplishments of  improved  service and reduced administrative costs
 (and coordination of sewerage systems  management  - although this  was
omitted from the  report) would  still  occur.
                               282

-------
Financial advantages and disadvantages are as noted in the previous
sections on regional alternatives.

The disadvantages listed for a regional multi-purpose government are
the same as for single-purpose regional authority (number 6 above):
it would require an additional governmental entity, new legislation,
and remove control from local government jurisdiction.

The consultant's report went on to discuss various alternate financial
methods and cost allocation formulas, but these will not be discussed
in this field report.  The report concluded with a listing of factors
that would be necessary in trying to gain the support of local and
regional bodies.  These were:  (1) awareness of the problem, (2)
acceptance of the regional plan,   (3) leadership, (^) cooperation,
(5) general concern for the water quality of the region, (6) cost
effectiveness, and (7) interest in continued development of the Trinity
River.

Ecological Study

One of the accomplishments that the Planning Department points to with
pride is its sponsorship and participation in an ecological study of
the Dallas County area.  When the task of reviewing Environmental  Impact
Statements was assigned to the Planning Department, it quickly became
evident to them that they had no data bank from which to draw estimates
of the environmental impacts of proposed projects.

Their subsequent budget included $25,000 for a study for an ecological
data bank.  However, when they contacted several environmental consultants,
their estimates for an appropriate study design ran from $200,000 to
$300,000.  However, another consultant, who had directed a routing study
for Wisconsin Power and Light Company which involved displaying ecological
data on maps, agreed to do the study for the budgeted sum, providing
the Planning Department did the data source search and coding (under
the supervision of the consultant).     The consultant would also be
responsible for interpreting infrared maps, the modelling of tolerance
levels, and the programming necessary to display the data on maps.

The staff met with a panel of local environmental experts in a day-long
seminar.  These local experts identified critical data elements,
weighed  their relative significance, and provided information on where
to find the data.  One important  reason why the project could be completed
within the cost restraints was that much of the data had been collected
already by other agencies and the study had merely to code it for  its
own use.  Virtually all of the data were from secondary sources, although
some field visits were made to collect some data.  Important sources for
information included United States Geological Service maps, infrared
mapping from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Corps
of Engineers, Soil Conservation Service, Dallas Geological Society, and
local experts.
                               283

-------
Criteria were developed for the selection of variables to be included.
These included:

      1.  Enable spatial relationship of information.
      2.  Enable recording of information for future use in impact
          quantification.
      3.  Enable value judgements to be placed upon systems and their
          sub-uni ts.
      k.  Allow for the up-dating of the stored information.
      5.  Allow for the analysis of information for multi-purpose planning.
      6.  Be feasible from an economic and time standpoint.
      7.  Enable in-house capability for carrying on the planning process.
      8.  Enable transfer of programs and methodology for on-going in-
          house operation.
      9.  Provide the complexity of data appropriate to the level of
          decision-making required.

Data was collected on 32 natural resource variables and 3 measures
of urbanization.  The natural resources were part of 5 eco-systems;
there were 5 zoological characteristics (e.g., Pileated Woodpecker
habitat, complex wiIdlife areas), 10 botanical characteristics (e.g.,
unique botanical areas, natural and man-made marsh), 1*» hydromorphic
characteristics (e.g., flood plains, watersheds), 1 edaphic character-
istic (i.e., 9 soil associations), and 2 geomorphic characteristics
(i.e., 7 surface geology types, and fault lines).  See Addendum c
for the complete list of variables for which data was collected.   In
addition to the individual variables, maps were also generated from
them for 6 eco-systems  (hydromorphic was subdivided  into surface
and sub-surface), and for 2 broader systems--the biotic (i.e.,
botanical and zoological) and abiotic.  A number of other maps were also
generated and will be discussed later.

The data on these variables were collected for 10,000 grids or cells.
Although this seems large, it must be noted that the study area  (Dallas
County) was 900 square miles.  The result is that each cell contained
61.8 acres—or to put it another way, each cell was  1/3 mile in length.
This relatively large size was deemed appropriate, considering the
scale of the data source maps and hence the efficiency of delineating
and extracting the data, and the level of decision-making requiring
the data to be collected.  Despite the assurance that quite a few
developments in Dallas exceed 62 acres, it seems that cells of such a
large size limit the utility of the project.

Once the data were collected, and  interpreted and delineated (i.e.,
to fit the grid scale of the study), patterns were extracted (i.e.,
either the predominant pattern for a resource  in a cell was noted, or the
proportion of the cell covered by the resource was calculated).  The
next step was to code these data; a numerical code was used on OCR
(Optical Scanner Reader) forms.   (The equipment used for the project
included:  one  IBM 370 OS VS1, five  IBM 2^02 Tape Drives, one  IBM
Printer, three  IBM 2319  Disc Storage Devices, one  IBM 25^0  Card Reader
Punch, and one  IBM 1287  Optical Character Scanner.)  The final step
of the process  involved  producing maps for each of the variables.  See
Addendum d  for sample maps.
                                284

-------
In addition to indicating the predominance and location of these
natural resources, a major element of the program is to indicate
the sensitivity of these resource patterns to human impact.  The con-
sultant was responsible for the modeling that resulted in these estimates
of tolerance, although judgments for some of the component factors were
often made by the local experts.  These maps of resource tolerance
could then be combined under a variety of conditions or value assumptions.
For instance, a map was produced which assumed that the preservation
of each eco-system was of equal importance and hence indicated the
tolerance of the area for development or human impact; a second map
merely showed the areas where there was a multiplicity of ecological
subsystems rather than their degree of tolerance; a third map assumed
that the biotic component was twice as important as other components
(they noted that the biotic community was easier to identify and observe,
and therefore could serve as a valuable indicator of the changes
occurring in the ecological environment).  A fourth map utilized the
urbanization data and therefore suggested (when combined with other
data from the study) which areas were suitable for urban development.

The ecology project, according to the report prepared by the con-
sultant entitled Dallas Eco-Study,  was viewed as performing three basic
functions:  (1) It identified, quantified, and mapped the extent and
location of 32 natural resources that are part of the Dallas County
ecological system, (2) it stored and displayed the data on the relative
tolerance of the ecological systems to human impacts, and (3) it
provided a mechanism for the development of models to evaluate the
impact of projects on natural resources.

A number of other functions or uses of the study could be noted, too:

      1.  Several members of the Planning Department now have an intimate
          knowledge of the ecological environment of the Dallas area
          by virtue of the in-house effort devoted to the project by
          the Planning Department—two men worked virtually full-time
          on the project for a year, and another two were involved for
          8 months, for a total of 40 man-months.

      2.  The Planning Department has developed its skills, by its
          participation on the project, so that it can carry out much
          of the program envisioned for Phase II  or even later develop-
          ments; Phase II includes expanding the system to include so-
          called "cultural" variables such as census data, historic
          landmarks, land use, and land values; subsequent phases may
          involve updating the data, or even revising them for a smaller
          grid system.

      3.  A mechanism has been developed that may be useful in monitoring
          the degradation of the  ecological environment--or more
          optimistically, the protection or enhancement of this portion
          of man's environment.
                               285

-------
          The results of the project may be useful  for studies of
          general routing (e.g., regional  transit)  or siting of public
          facilities.  But it must be noted that specific or detailed
          planning or evaluation cannot be done because of the large
          size of each cell  (approximately 62 acres).

          An instrument has  been developed that will  prove useful as
          an environmental education tool—e.g., its  role as part of the
          environment curriculum to be developed for  Dallas schools on
          an experimental basis under a recent grant  from the Department
          of Health, Education, and Welfare.

          It has served as a vehicle for enlisting community participation.
          In addition to the efforts of the consultant and the Planning
          Department staff,  approximately 25 volunteers in groups of
          three to four worked twice a week for six months (or approximate-
          ly 2-3 man-months  of effort) coding the data.
Environmental Quality Standards and Enforcement

In discussing environmental quality standards and associated enforce-
ment processes, a logical starting point would be to analyze the state
agencies and their role, followed by an analysis of Dallas' activities.
The focus here is on air and water pollution.

In 1965, the State of Texas created the Texas Air Control Board as a
semi-autonomous arm of the State Department of Health.  The governor
appoints a nine member Board, including an engineer, a licensed physician,
a representative from industry, a municipal government representative,
an agricultural engineer, and the remaining four from the general public.
A primary goal of the Board is the development of a general plan for
the control of air pollution by adopting and promulgating rules and
regulations governing air pollution.  In addition, it directs the
activities of the Texas Air Control Program, administered by the State
Department of Health, and includes investigating possible sources of
air pollutfon, holding hearings on complaints for litigation through
the Attorney General's Office, and seeking compliance with its regulations.
The Board has established a standard for particulate matter at 55
micrograms/cubic meter, as compared with the federal primary (the level
at which human health is affected) and secondary (the level at which
effects are felt on "human welfare values") standards of 75 micrograms/
cubic meter and 60 micrograms/cubic meter.  The State Board operates
regional offices in cities without air pollution program, and this is
especially the case with the suburbs in Dallas County.

In the City of Dallas, the Air Pollution Division, of the Health Depart-
ment was created in 1966.  In 1968, the city council adopted an ordinance
for the  initiation of an enforcement program.  At the present time,
the Air Pollution Control Section has 2k permanent employees, with
twelve of these being added during the last eighteen months.  Those
                               286

-------
employees involved in enforcement process go every six months for train-
ing programs and examination by the Texas Air Pollution Control Board.
The Air Pollution Control Section has an operating budget of $269,000
with 50% of the revenues from the City's general  fund and the remain-
ing 50% from a federal grant.  For the purpose of this discussion, the
functions will be artifically divided into monitoring and enforcement
activities.  The monitoring  is generally conducted on a routine sight
inspection or surveillance.  If a question does arise, a sample is
collected and tested  in the  laboratory for elements other than hydrocarbons.
For  monitoring purposes the City is divided into five sections with
two inspection teams conducting the inspection.   In addition, the Section
monitors the overall air quality and issues warnings, if necessary, as
well as 24-hour  forecasts.  The air pollution index combines two factors
(particulate matter and NC^) into a numerical scale:

      0-30 Light
     31-60 Moderate
     61-90 Heavy
     91 - 100  Severe
     100 above Alert

It should be pointed out that 85-90% of the air pollution is caused by
the automobile, but the Section does not get involved at all in auto
emission standards and enforcement.

The enforcement function of the Section is oriented toward close
cooperation between government and industry.  If voluntary compliance
is not achieved after continual surveillance, the Section has taken
industries violating the air quality standard to court.  At the present
time,  there have been 18 convictions with fines of generally $100,
four cases were dismissed, and two cases are presently in  the district
courts.  The fines while not significant in terms of monetary value,
have been made.  It is estimated that since 1966, industry in Dallas
has spent $2.5 million for equipment and an equal amount for maintenance
and operation of air pollution control  systems.  The Air Pollution
Control Section points out that the annual mean level of particulate
matter has declined from 106 micrograms/cubic meter in 1967-1968
to 78 micrograms/cubic meter in 1970-1971-  At the present time, there
is minimal information regarding gaseous pollutants.

In 1967, the State of Texas  passed  the Texas Water Quality Act,
succeeding the Texas Water Pollution Control Board.  The Water Quality
Act outlines a statewide control system to coordinate all water quality
control programs of various state agencies and local governments with
those of the Federal government.  The Water Quality Board requires cities
over 5,000 to have a water quality surveillance program with a laboratory
and the development of a plan describing what the city can do and  is
doing regarding the problem of surface runoff.   In addition, the Board
does maintain regional offices.
                               287

-------
The City of Dallas has had an industrial waste ordinance since 1958
and is in the process of upgrading the industrial waste standards in
keeping with federal guidelines.  These new standards are aimed at
better pre-treatment by industry and reclamation of some materials
that would otherwise reach downstream.  The primary sources of water
pollution are:

      --industrial wastes
      — insufficiently treated sanitary sewage
      --insufficiently treated storm sewage
      --septic tank overflow
      --agricultural runoff conaining chemical fertilizers and pesticides

The Water Department is responsible for industrial waste water dis-
charges.

In addition, there is the Water Quality Surveillance Program adminis-
tered by the Water Quality Section of the Health Department.  The Water
Quality Section has a staff of twelve persons, five of which are
responsible for discharges into creeks and storm drains and for monitor-
ing discharges under permits from the Texas Water Quality Board.  The
enforcement programs have stressed cooperation.  Dallas has little
heavy industry except for concrete and cement manufacturing firms.  Out
of some two hundred cases, one or two have been referred to the Texas
Water Quality Board with accompanying threats of legal action.  At
the present time, no cases have been taken to court.
Water Reclamation Research Center

As an integral part of their waste water program, the City of Dallas has
established the Water Reclamation Research Center to conduct research
on a possible prototype, advanced waste water treatment facility.  The
idea started  in 19&5 when it became evident that at some future date,
Dallas might be forced to reuse its water resources.  By 1967, a plan
was finalized and application to the Federal Water Quality Office for
federal assistance was made.  The purposes of the Research Center was
to develop design criteria and construction programming to upgrade
plant effluent.  The demonstration plant consisted of a building to house
instrumentation, chemical feeding equipment, and filtration units.  In
addition, the facility included:

      --two aeration basins and a final settling basin for studying
        the activated sludge process
      —a solid contact upflow basin for studying coagulation and
        clarification
      --a chlorine contact basin for studying disinfection of the
        waste water.

The plan proposed the study of the following items:
                               288

-------
      --lime assisted phosphate precipitation followed by activated
        sludge treatment and filtration
      —activated sludge treatment with and without sedimentation
        followed by coagulation and lime-assisted phosphate precipi-
        tation and filtration
      --phosphate removal by activated sludge
      —combinations of trickling filters with activated sludge
        treatment.

Construction on the Research Center began in 1969 and was completed in
April 1970.  For two years a rigorous research program was under-
taken in cooperation with Texas A £ M University which resulted in $8%
removal  of BOD and suspended solids.  The program for the pilot demon-
stration plant cost $850,000 of which 5&% was from the federal grant
and kb% local funds.  The accompanying research laboratory also cost
approximately $850,000 with 65% of the funds from federal grants
and 35% from local funds.  By June 1972, the Research Center had success-
fully completed its research on the removal of BOD and suspended solids.
To continue research design for water resource reuse, the Research
Center is presently engaged in viral research, an area where little
is known on the effect of waste water treatment on viruses.
SUMMARY

The City of Dallas does not appear to have as severe environmental
problems as other major urban centers.  Its geographical location,
natural environment, and clean industries aid programs  in improving
environmental quality.  Dallas and its regional governmental bodies
have developed many diverse environmental programs for environmental
management.  The development of  an  ecosystem inventory  is a major innovation
which could be followed by other municipalities.  The research effort
on waste water treatment could help municipalities faced with similar
water resource problems.
                              289

-------
                           ADDENDUM a.
                       ORDINANCE NO. 13113

An Ordinance amending Section 35-66 of Article VIM  of Chapter 35
(Dallas Plumbing Code) of the I960 Revised Code of Civil  and Criminal
Ordinances of the City of Dallas, Texas; Providing for the regulation
of the discharge of Industrial  wastes and domestic sewage; Providing for
a Savings Clause; Providing for a fine not to exceed Two  Hundred Dollars
($200.00); and, Providing for an effective date.


   BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DALLAS:

SECTION 1.  That Section 35-66  of Article VIM  of Chapter 35 of the
I960 Revised Code of Civil  and  Criminal  Ordinances of the City of
Dallas, Texas, is hereby amended so as to hereafter read  as follows:

      "Section 35-66.   Industrial Wastes.  All  industrial wastes or
      domestic sewage being discharged to a storm drain,  storm sewer,
      drainage ditch,  or water  course within the  city limits of the
      City of Dallas shall  discharge to and be connected  with the
      sanitary sewer system of  the City of Dallas.  Any exception to
      the above will be with the approval of the  Director of Public
      Works, and the Director of Public Health, and with  the permission
      of the Texas Water Quality Board to discharge such  industrial
      waste to a storm drain, storm sewer, drainage ditch, or water
      course within the city limits of the City of Dallas.

      Wastes which are detrimental to the public  sewer system or are
      detrimental to the functioning of the sewage treatment plan, shall
      be treated as provided in Section 35-102 or as may  be required
      to comply with other wastes that are prohibited in  whole or in
      part as is specifically detailed in Section 49-100  of Article III
      of Chapter 49 of the Revised Code of Civil  and Criminal Ordinances
      of the City of Dallas, Texas."

SECTION 2.  That Chapter 35 (Dallas Plumbing Code) of the I960
Revised Code of Civil  and Criminal Ordinances of  the City of Dallas,
Texas, as heretofore amended, save and except as  amended  herein, shall
remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 3.  That this Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
its passage and final  publication in accordance with the  provisions of
the Charter of the City of Dallas, and it is accordingly  so ordained.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:                 Passed:  November 2, 1970
                                     Correctly Enrolled:   November 2,  1970
N. ALEX BICKLEY, CITY ATTORNEY        ATTEST:  Harold G. Shank
                                              City Secretary
By:  David W. HowelI
     Assistant City Attorney

                               290

-------
                           ADDENDUM
                       ORDINANCE NO. 13^89

An Ordinance creating the COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY;
providing a term for which the Committee shall  exist; providing a staff
to assist the Committee; generally prescribing  the scope and purposes
of its activities; providing for a report and recommendations to the
City Council; repealing Ordinance No.  13386; and providing an effective
date.
WHEREAS, in its report to the City Council, the Committee to Study the
Feasibility of Creating an Environmental  Quality Board for the City
of Dallas, as a result of its deliberations, has recommended the
establishment of a committee on environmental  quality; and

WHEREAS, a broad policy framework is needed to guide City Departments
and officials toward coordinated action to assist in solving the
problems of air, water and noise pollution; Now, Therefore,

    BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE  CITY OF DALLAS:

SECTION 1.  CREATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON  ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY.  There
is hereby created a committee to be known as the COMMITTEE ON ENVIRON-
MENTAL QUALITY, hereinafter called "the Committee", which shall be
an advisory body and shall be composed of seventeen members, including
a Chairman, Vice Chairman, and fifteen other members; the Chairman, Vice
Chairman and members to be appointed by the City Council.  The members
shall serve without pay and shall adopt such rules and regulations as
they may deem best for the governing of their  actions, proceedings and
deliberations and shall set the time and  place of their meetings.

The members of the Committee shall be citizens of the City and shall
be selected from among the following groups:  Architects, planners,
landscape architects, engineers, medical  societies, home builders,
real estate, professionals, industry, environmental organizations, League
of Women Voters, American Association of  University Women, high
school students, college students and others that the City Council
shall determine.

SECTION 2.  TERM OF SERVICE.  The members of the Committee shall serve
for a term to expire s ix (6) months from  the date of the swearing in of
a majority of the Committee, at which time the Committee shall  have
completed its assignment and shall present a report and briefing to
the Council.  The City Council may, by resolution, extend the term of
the members of the Committee beyond said  date  upon a determination
of the necessity for such extension.
                               291

-------
SECTION 3.  STAFF.  The Committee shall be aided in its work by the
staff of the City Manager's Office and by the staffs of appropriate
Departments of the City.

SECTION 4.  SCOPE OF ACTIVITIES.  The purposes, aims and scope of the
activities of the Committee herein created, shall be generally the
development and submission of a recommended City-wide environmental
policy, with consideration of specific categories and environmental con-
cerns including, water  (pollution and thermal condition) quality, air
pollution (including dust, odor and equipment emissions), noise
pollution, visual pollution, open space, land use, population, and
solid waste pollution.  The pursuit of such assignment by the Committee
shall involve the following:

      (1)  Assessment of environmental preservation action and
           improvements accomplished or in progress.
      (2)  Identification of instances where environmental improvements
           can be made.
      (3)  Inventory and documentation of community environmental
           problems, ranking them in order of severity of effects
           on residents.
      (4)  Identification of needs for the following:
           (a)  Research, experimentation and expanded special
                environmental projects;
           (b)  Planning strategies;
           (c)  Programs for public information.
      (5)  Definition of an appropriate City role in the solution of
           environmental problems.
      (6)  Submission of recommendations for new and revised ordinances
           and regulations for environmental improvements.
      (7)  Development of recommended changes in City procedures,
           programs, or activities that contribute to the solution
           of our environmental problems.
      (8)  Suggestions as to means of creating an awareness of
           environmental problems throughout the community.
      (9)  Identification of opportunities for community cooperation,
           interagency cooperation and intergovernmental cooperation
           in programs to improve the environment.
     (10)  Such other related matters that the Committee deems of
           benefit to the City Council in attacking the environmental
           problems of  the City.

SECTION 5-  REPORT.  The Committee, in its advisory capacity, shall make
its  report and recommendation  in writing to the City Council six months
from the date of  the swearing  in of a majority of the Committee, unless
such deadline  is  extended by resolution from the City Council.
                                292

-------
SECTION 6.  REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 13386.  That Ordinance No.  13386,
passed by the City Council on September 27, 1971, is hereby expressly
repealed; provided that all appointments made by the City Council  under
said Ordinance shall constitute valid appointments hereunder.

SECTION 7.  ORDINANCE NOT TO BE CODIFIED.  Since this Committee is
of a temporary nature, this Ordinance shall not be codified as  a
part of the I960 Revised Code of Civil and Criminal  Ordinances  of  the
City of Dal las.

SECTION 8.  EFFECTIVE DATE.  That this Ordinance shall  take effect
immediately from and after its passage in accordance with the  provisions
of the Charter of the City of Dallas and it is accordingly so  ordained.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:                  Passed:   January 3, 1972

N. ALEX BICKLEY, CITY ATTORNEY        Correctly Enrolled:  January 3, 1972

                                      ATTEST:   Harold G.  Shank
By:  ANALESLIE MUNCY                           City Secretary
     ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
                               293

-------
                           ADDENDUM c




           ECOLOGICAL STUDY NATURAL RESOURCE VARIABLES






CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS (3)




020        Urbanized Area 1959




021        Urban Growth 1959-68




025        Urbanized Area 1970




ZOOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS  (5)




100        Rookery




101        Pileated Woodpecker Habitat




102        Black Capped Vireo Habitat




103        Trinity River Floodplain




lO't        Complex Wildlife Areas  (generated)




BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS (10)




150        Unique Botanical  Areas




151        Cedar Break




152        Upland Forst



153        Lowland Forest/Gulches, Gullies, & Small Streams




151*        Black Prairie (generated)




155        Marsh (Natural)




156        Aquatic  (Natural)




157        Marsh (Man-Made)




158        Aquatic  (Man-Made)




159        Lowland Forests/Flood Plain
                               294

-------
HYDROMORPHIC CHARACTERISTICS (1*0




250        Watersheds




251        Lake




252        Pond




253        River



25*t        Stream




255        Intermittent Stream




256        Intermittent Lake




257        Intermittent Pond




260        Flood Plains




261        Flooded Area Dependent upon Pumps




262        Aquifer:  Woodbine Sand




263        Aquifer:  Paluxy Sand




26^        Aquifer:  Basal Trinity Sand




265        Aquifer:  Woodbine Recharge Area




EDAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS (l)




300        Soil Associations




GEOMORPHIC CHARACTERISTICS (2)




350        Surface Geology




351        Faults
                              295

-------
                 ECOLdGICAL
SBiyfrc* MAPS

A* I r
•f ' '.
*>* '
4 T5
4 *
*.*>*
**,»"
«4 1C
fc*?P



IS*"'
-S3A5
6 -75

**"
*!"



33'
5 15

31 S
310

Sf"
7Q"
?ir


626^
62^5


6?«"

67J"



6?1JC
• JflO
61
6429
6*1 5
«41fl
4*35
4*OC
4 34 9
63?5
6370
63A5
63iC
63*5
63*0
6335
6330

632*

6310
6305
6300
6240
6203
6275
6?70
6Z65
62S5
tZit
6?* 4
62*0
6235
6230
6225
6220
6715
6210
6233
6193
.« . 6185
.«« x 4103
••• «.. 6175
.O ««« 4170
.«• 6164
6160
. . 614
• 4. *1*
• A, 61*
oeo. 613
.**{»( + . 613
M» 612
„ *«^ .«Q I,,. 6|t
•*e. .«« ... 6it
*e•«*• 6O*0
..... 6039
O«O«* 6O30
.. ,6 6025
.• 6020

                                         DALLAS CCOCOCICAL STUDY
P1LEATED WOODPECKER HABITAT
FIGURE 32 ZOOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTIC: PILEA.TED WOODPECKER HABITAT




                            296

-------
                   ECOLOGICAL STUDY SAMPLE MAPS
                           ADDENDUM d.


a
«
e
•
#
«
4
«
*
f-
1
*
£
*.




-V -..,.,,.,. -,. J- ,. 	 ..-,». .<; ,,-.:. ,,-, , 	 	 - ,,.- , ,,,. ^ , t , , ,, , j ,,, , , j , , t j j ,2^^ - ;3;~tnmi J??^?!3J3 1


*« 	 ,«-t*--r-- -••'• 	 rrff..--c-^"rc 	 rrc.-ccr L rllL.4,.t..»».«»«.*»*^*».*.
i- , .. tt-f"--'t 	 <_. (..,. ' ^.C 	 '.1... vL«.Ci,,L-,. ...«..»......-
a- 	 -«-*<* *-*«»***». CCCCCLCCCCC,: 	 *««r - j» j*? »*
^c ...,,.». 	 	 e-t-e-a,....*£ccrcr':cr:rc 	 »*•- 	 >a,-i



j
7
-
• e^i 5
* e«3S
* «*is
• 6340
I 6335
t C37-5
• £370
l ( JtS
I «'b5
1 6350
I «)*5
• e 3«o
i eii&
9 fclJO
II « J?5
• eiiO
c e?is
J 631 0
C 6300
5 6245
; :<;o
: 255
» 2TC
i ;es
• <;-s
C t?50
i e;*c
• C735
k 6230
I t^?5
t fflt
» C21C
» 6?:3
t\9*
t fcl "5
* «I38
» 6t 7f
» * 1 TC
» eie*
4155
ei*iC
£145
CMC
M 3!
6139
<123
6120
en:
6110
610C
6190
60iO
*09S
ccno
< 6070
1 *163
1 €C55
1 6050
6C J5
*ria

HYD3OMORPHEC - SUBSURFACE
                                          DALLAS CL*NNINC
                                                      CCVELDPMC«>T
FIGURE 44

RELATIVE  TOLERANCE  OF  HYDROMORPHIC SUBSYSTEM - SUBSURFACE (604)


                             297

-------
                           APPENDIX 3


        REPORT ON THE FIELD TRIP TO INGLEWOOD, CALIFORNIA
Introduction

Inglewood is a city of 90,000 population concentrated in 8.85 square
miles.  It is one of seventy-seven cities in Los Angeles County,  and
much of the city lies in the landing approach to one of the world's
busiest airports (Los Angeles International).  It was incorporated
in 1908 and there are a number of homes that date to that era.   Its
government is a counci1-manager system.

Each of these characteristics affects the nature of its environment
or the strategies and organization adopted to manage it.  The city
manager is a dynamic leader and a major source of policy innovation.
Innovation, generally, is not hampered by a lack of home rule;
"...by general law [California] grants all cities a greater range of
authority than many other states allow their municipalities even  under
home rule....  The classification of cities into 'general-law1  and
'home-rule'  (or 'charter') categories consequently loses most of  its
significance  in this state."*  The city's age has meant it contains a
number of older houses ready for destruction, and because of the
economics of housing it has seen large areas rezoned for apartments.
Its proximity to Los Angeles' ghetto has led to an interplay of the
issues of growth and race.   Its proximity to Los Angeles' airport has
made noise pollution its major environmental problem and a high priority
political issue.  Being only one city  in a very large metropolitan area
means  It has  little control over its environment.  Inglewood's decision
makers have no control over major sources of pollution which are  ex-
ternal to its city limits, and even some local sources of pollution are
the responsibility of other units of government.  For example, air
pollution in the Los Angeles Air Basin is the responsibility of the Air
Pollution Control District rather than the individual cities' responsi-
bility.  In addition, the economic interdependence of a metropolitan are;
means  that local businesses are frequently owned by non-residents and
that residents usually work outside the city limits, resulting in a com-
plex pattern of political  identification, which is compounded by  meager
media  coverage of local government other than Los Angeles'.  One  conse-
quence of this is that local units of environmental interest groups are
organized to play an active  role at the metropolitan level rather than
in the individual suburbs.   Its population density suggests a fully
*Henry A. Turner and John A. Vieg, The Government and Politics of
 California  (New York:McGraw-Hi11  Book Company, 196^), pp. 203-0*1.
                               298

-------
developed city with relatively little open space available for public
recreation  (when city fathers proudly point to planters and "open-
space" on the third floor of its Civic Center as one of its parks, one
can easily understand that Inglewood is far from typical.)

This report covers Inglewood's environmental program.  First it
examines their program in noise pollution which includes a program of
legal suits, and a set of standards and machinery to monitor and en-
force them, as well as a number of other activities.  Then it reports
on Inglewood's use of the Environmental Impact Statement process for
both public and private projects.  A third area of attention is the
Property Maintenance Program which Inglewood considers part of its
environmental management strategy because it is geared to impede de-
terioration and therefore to improve aesthetics while obviating the
need for some urban redevelopment projects.  Finally, the report
briefly examines the organizational arrangement used to manage the
envi ronment.
NOISE

Inglewood's concern with the environment as a policy issue began with
the aircraft noise problem.  Its concern soon expanded to include
other sources of noise pollution.  It then developed still further
until it  included the other traditional aspects of the physical envi-
ronment.  Eventually environment as a policy was integrated with other
social policy issues.

The noise problem for Inglewood, which is adjacent to Los Angeles
International Airport, had increased with the almost exclusive use of
jets and with the great growth of air travel that marked the 1960's.
Although the aircraft noise problem was obvious to anyone walking the
streets of Inglewood, it manifested itself as a serious political prob-
lem at several neighborhood meetings held during the first month of
service of the new City Manager  (April 1968).  Threats of political
action against City Council incumbents running in the forthcoming elec-
tion made it evident that an immediate program of action was necessary.
An internal  staff investigation was initiated by the City Manager, a
former pilot, and the City Attorney (who also came into office in
April 1968)  and encouraged by the Mayor, who was also a former pilot.
It proceeded while an acoustical consultant hired by the previous City
Manager prepared his report.   The latter was issued in November 1968
and contained technical  and other data on noise in Inglewood.

These initial studies indicated a need for further data, as well  as
provided a framework for the future environmental management strategy
for Inglewood.  The need for further data was partially met by a study
indicating that real estate values had been adversely affected
                               299

-------
by aircraft noise.*  Plans were also developed to monitor the noise
in Inglewood's environment.  Subsequent studies also brought confir-
mation of citizen concern about noise — a 1969 survey indicated that
almost half the respondents listed aircraft noise control as the most
important community issue, and a 1970 survey found that sixty-one
percent felt that finding a solution to the jet noise problem was "of
greatest importance" (this compared to seventy-three percent for crime
in the streets and thirty-two percent for school integration/segrega-
tion.)

The strategy evolved into a ten-point program that was adopted
by the City Council in September 1969.  The program was to be carried
out, in part, by a newly created Environmental Standards Division
that was formally placed within  the Building Department, but actually
reported directly to the City Manager.  A Director was hired in
November 1969 after a recruitment compaign that included newspaper
advertisements, including a successful ad in the Wall Street Journal.

      The ten-point plan called for:

      1.    A series of law suits against Los Angeles for damages
            on behalf of residents and property owners in Ingle-
            wood, and to compel them to extend their runways there-
            by permitting landing aircraft to be at a higher
            altitude while over Inglewood.

            With the help of special counsel, a suit was filed
            against the City of Los Angeles (which owns the air-
            port) in the U.S. District Court in May 1969.  A
            practically identical suit was filed in the California
            Superior Court In October 1969.  The main reason for
            initiating the backup suit in the state court was that
            it had a lower minimum monetary jurisdiction — a
            plaintiff has to have damages of $10,000 to sue in
            federal court, but only $5,000 in the state court.

            The federal court ruled that  Inglewood did not have
            standing to sue.  This decision was appealed to the
            Court of Appeals which ruled that Inglewood could sue
            and remanded the case back to the lower court which,
*The computerized correlation study showed that high noise levels were
 associated with low  land values.  The correlation was statistically
 significant and indicated that  land subject to noise levels less than
 80 PndB were valued  on the average fifty percent higher than land
 subject to noise levels greater than 110 PndB.  High noise levels were
 also associated with high vacancy rates.  The vacancy rate correlation
 was statistically significant for rental dwelling units and showed that
 on the average the vacancy rate was fifty percent higher in areas sub-
 ject to aircraft noise levels above 110 PndB than In areas where air-
 craft noise was less than 80 PndB.
                               300

-------
      in part, was to determine as part of the trial  whether
      the owners had suffered the minimum amount of damages
      necessary for a federal suit.

      But Inglewood decided to drop their federal  suit and
      press their case in the state court.  They won  the first
      round when the court rejected Los Angeles' motion to
      dismiss the case on the grounds of "multiplicity of
      actions" (i.e., the suit in Federal Court and a separate
      suit by a group of Inglewood residents).  Los Angeles'
      appeal of this decision is now under consideration.  In
      addition, since Inglewood's suit in federal  court was
      filed in behalf of residents,  some of these are trying to
      have the Federal suit reinstated.

      This discussion of Inglewood's civil suits clearly indi-
      cates one of the major weaknesses of this strategy -- i.e.,
      it is subject to great delays, increasing its costs.

      Inglewood's criminal  case did not fare better.   When the
      city filed misdemeanor charges in March 1971 against an
      airline's pilot for violating its noise ordinance, an
      injunction against enforcement of this part of  the ordi-
      nance was issued.

      An additional aspect of Inglewood's "legal" strategy, was
      its financial support for the appeal of a case  involving
      the efforts of a near-by city (Burbank) to control evening
      flights from an airport within its own city limits.  This
      case was decided against Burbank on May 14,  1973, by a 5-4
      vote of the U.S. Supreme Court, which, however, apparently
      still left open the question of whether municipally owned
      airports could regulate aircraft noise at its own facilities.

2.    A comprehensive noise ordinance.  Development of the ordi-
      nance and enforcement of it required a variety  of monitoring
      equipment.  The equipment that was purchased included a van
      which contained a microphone,  precision sound level meter,
      octave band analyzer, graphic recorder, stereo tape recorder,
      aircraft band and shortwave radios, camera equipment, and
      tools and other accessories.  Some of this equipment was for
      the city's general noise monitoring program, but some of it
      was for its specialized campaign on aircraft noise.  In
      addition to this portable equipment, there were also four
      fixed microphones on telephone poles in the flight path and
      a central recording station in City Hall to receive the air-
      craft noise data.   It should be noted that a city could
      begin its program with a relatively simple hand-held meter
      (although it would have limited utility for any court cases).
                         301

-------
            The equipment  also provided  the  City  with  data  needed
            for its suits.

            Financing for  the equipment  — which  cost  approximately
            $50,000 -- and  staff  originally  came  from  a  special  four
            percent utility tax earmarked  for  this  purpose,  but  the
            program is currently  financed  from the  general  fund.

            The noise ordinance that  was adopted  is similar to the
            Model  Noise Ordinance developed  by the  League of Califor-
            nia Cities. The ordinance establishes  standards which
            vary according  to different  zones  and times.    For
            instance the assumed  base ambient  noise level for resi-
            dential areas  at night is forty-five  dbA,  while it is
            fifty-five dbA  during the day; this compares  to sixty-
            five dbA for commercial  zones  during  the day.   Any
            continuous noise five dbA above  the ambient  level is
            prohibited; guidelines suggested that intermittent noise
            (less  than five minutes  an hour) should not  exceed ten
            dbA above the  ambient, and short duration  noise (lasting
            only a few seconds) is limited to  fifteen  dbA above the
            ambient for purposes  of  enforcement.

            A special provision was  written  for aircraft  noise.
            Because of earlier federal court rulings limiting the
            power  of other  cities to regulate  interstate  commerce
            such as airplane flights,* the ordinance exempted any
            planes flying  in conformities with federal air  regulations
            or traffic control instructions.  But if a plane was in
            violation of these rules —  e.g.,  flying significantly
            below the proscribed  landing approach glide path -- it was
            prohibited from producing noise  levels  above  ninety dbA.

            The ordinance  took effect in November 1970,  and the first
            plane was cited for violation  of it in  March  1971-  But
            immediately after this misdemeanor citation was issued,  an
            injunction against enforcement of  this  part of  the ordinance
            was issued.

      3.    Building codes were to be revised  requiring sound-proofing
            of all new construction and  remodeling. Various forms of
            incentive zoning were considered as aid.

      J*.    Master plan and zoning regulations were to be re-examined
            in order to adjust land use in areas  in the aircraft
            landing corridors.
*E.G. Allegheny Airlines v. Village of Cedarhurst, 238 F. 2d 812 (2d
 Cir. 1956), and American Airlines, Inc., v. Town of Hempstead, 398 F.
 2d 369 (2d Cir. 1968).
                               302

-------
      5.    The city attempted to get Los Angeles to extend its
            runways toward the ocean, thus permitting planes to
            be at a higher altitude while flying over Inglewood.
            This proposed measure is presently under consideration.

      6.    It also tried to get other revisions in the approach
            pattern -- e.g., prohibiting turns in the area.

      7.    In addition it urged that approaches to the airport be
            at a steeper angle.

      8.    It urged the airlines to develop quieter (and cleaner)
            engines.

      9.    It proposed that the City should intervene in all  FAA,
            CAB, and California Public Utilities Commission pro-
            ceedings affecting noise.

     10.    In addition, it helped form a national  organization
            concerned with noise abatement -- NOISE (National  Orga-
            nization to Insure a Sound-controlled Environment).

Although not listed as part of its ten-point program, the city has made
efforts to insure that its own equipment does not contribute to noise
pollution and it is engaged in a major equipment sound-proofing program
(e.g., on its one-man sanitation trucks).  It also engaged in an  ex-
tensive public relations campaign to focus attention on the problem.

In conclusion, Inglewood's noise pollution management plan attacked
the problem on a wide front.  Although some of the methods have been
manifestly unsuccessful — e.g., it has not won any court decisions  —
its efforts have had some success.  For instance, Los Angeles has
developed strict noise controls for the airport, as well  as altering
approaches.  Similarly, expertise developed by Inglewood has been utilized
by EPA  in its development of noise pollution regulations,  (Inglewood's
Environmental  Standards Supervisor was on loan to EPA for six months
under the provisions of the Intergovernmental Personnel Act) as well as
by Congress in its drafting of noise pollution laws.  In addition, some
City officials have seen Inglewood's efforts as not only an attempt  to
improve the environment of its citizens, but also to demonstrate  to  them
that their government cares about their health, well-being, and satis-
faction, and to reduce their feelings of isolation and helplessness.  The
City's concern for aircraft noise has spread to other forms of pollution
and other social issues.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
In May 1972, Inglewood's City Council  issued a set of environmental
impact study guidelines.  These guidelines incorporated into a formal
requirement, a procedure that already had been used by the staff for
                               303

-------
almost two years.  It also brought Inglewood into conformance with
the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 which required
environmental studies for all projects subject to public action."
The following broad categories of factors were to be considered in
order "to insure that all important aspects of an environmental
evaluation" were examined:

      1.    land transformation and construction (ten specific items,
            e.g., erosion, floods)

      2.    land use (six specific items, e.g., open space, resi-
            dent ial)

      3.    water resources  (four specific items, e.g., quality,
            drainage)

      k.    air quality  (five specific items, e.g., oxides,
            particulate matter)

      5.    service systems  (six specific items, e.g., sewerage
            system, refuse disposal)

      6.    transportation systems (four specific items, e.g.,
            automobile,  safety)

      7.    noise and vibration (two specific items, i.e., on-site,
            off-site)

      8.    aesthetics (two  specific items, i.e., scenery, structures)

      9.    community structure (six specific items, e.g., recreation,
            employment)

Each factor was to be evaluated separately for the project's construc-
tion phase and  its operating phase.  (See Addendum a.)

The process was described as follows:  The preparing agency prepared the
EIS and forwarded  it to  the  Environmental Standards Division for review.
Within fourteen days they were to forward it to the Planning Department
for review.  Within an additional seven days they were to forward  it to
the City Administrator,  who  was to decide within seven days whether the
project should  continue  to  its next phase (which would be the adoption
-•In September 1972, the California Supreme Court  interpreted the law
 to include private projects which involve city actions other than of
 a ministerial nature —  i.e.,  if the city grants approval on a project
 for which  it could have  denied approval, then the project is subject
 to an  EIS.
                                304

-------
of a design budget or a construction budget, depending on the nature
of the project).

Each reviewer of the EIS was to indicate either (l)  general  agreement
(no objection or only minor changes proposed) or (2) a need  for further
information or (3) major changes necessary in the EIS or (*») that the
action was unsatisfactory because "of the potential  degradation of the
environment [or]  the safeguards to protect the environment are inadequate
[or] the alternatives to proposed action need further analysis --
including the  'no action1 alternative."

In September 1972, just prior to the State Supreme Court decision ex-
panding the EIS requirement to include private projects, Inglewood issued
a policy statement for using "total impact analysis" on public and private
projects, thus broadening the scope of environmental concern in the
decision making process.

The principle "building block" of total impact analysis was  the quanti-
fication of environmental and social values.  The underlying objective
was to compare environmental, social, and economic costs with environ-
mental, social, and economic benefits.

The prescribed method was as follows:  For each environmental or social
cost or benefit the magnitude of the effect was to be estimated -- e.g.,
the number of people affected, or the quantity of air pollution created,
or decibels of sound produced.  Then an importance factor was to be
assigned; these were to consider the nature of the measurement unit of
the magnitude  (e.g., whether it was people, or parts-per-mi11 ion of air
pollution); it was also to vary with the type of land use affected —
e.g., residential areas were more important than open space.  Professional
judgment, questionnaires, or some form of group decision making were
suggested as methods to determine the appropriate importance factors.
Then these two quantities were to be multiplied resulting in "impact units"
for each effect.   Next, a dollar value was assigned  to each  impact unit,
and when this was multiplied by the number of impact units an estimate of
the net total  social cost/benefit resulted.  The comparison  of environ-
mental and social costs and benefits, and economic costs and benefits then
enabled the decision maker to judge the desirability of a particular
project.

The City used the principle , in varied forms, of total impact analysis
on three of its own environmental  impact studies:   a site for a water
treatment plant,  the construction and operation of the plant, and a
study of eight alternate freeway routes (the latter  did not  involve the
same degree of precision in the quantification of environmental impacts
nor any attempt to assess any economic values).
                               305

-------
To date, the method has proven useful, but also has encountered some
difficulties.  The highest rated sites for the water treatment plant proved
to be politically unacceptable, and a lower rated site was selected.
The attached illustration (Addendum b  )  of the completed total impact
analysts for the operation of the water treatment plant Illustrates
some of Its problems.  For example, the selection of the unit of
measurement for the magnitude of the effect can have a major impact on
the final  result.  Although the importance factor is far from arbitrary,
it may be difficult to justify the values assigned.  Similarly placing
an economic value upon an impact unit is  a difficult operation.

It should be noted, however, the presentation of the data elements
rather than only a single sum enables the decision maker to attach his
own values at each point.

When the California State Supreme Court ruled in September 1972,
that an EIS was necessary for private projects as well as public pro-
jects, the immediate impact throughout the state was turmoil.  The cities
were unprepared and their initial response was to impose moratoria on
zone changes, building permits, and other related municipal actions
until reasonable guidelines were developed.  The state subsequently
issued its own guidelines for the implementation of the law.

But Inglewood had developed its own procedure at the staff level
two years earlier, and this was officially adopted by the Council on
November 14, 1972.  Changes were made subsequently, in April 1973, that
brought Inglewood into general conformance with state-issued guidelines.
The process adopted in November 1972 instituted a requirement for an
Environmental Clearance Statement for any zone changes, variances, and
exceptions, special use and grading permits, filing of sub-division
tract maps, and building permits. (See Addendum c for this form.) Auto-
matic exceptions were granted for (a) detached single family dwellings,
and permits for such related items as pools, room additions and fences,
and (b) modifications entailing no expansion of use.  Other cities
granted exemptions for projects below a fixed number of units or value
of the project.  Subsequent State guidelines exempted similar projects
but permitted increased capacity up to fifty percent  in some situations.

In addition, Inglewood's procedure permitted the Environmental
Review Committee to exempt any project from the requirement to file an
Environmental Clearance Statement because the project did not have a
significant effect on the environment.

The Environmental Review Committee (ERC)  was composed of repre-
sentatives of the Planning and Development Department, Public Works
Department, Parks and Recreation Department, Fire Department, and Police
Department.  This review committee could  (a) find the project had no
significant  impact and therefore approve  it,  (b) find the project would
have an impact which could be alleviated  by some action, and thus  it
could conditionally approve the project with the provision that the
action was completed, or  (c) find the project had significant affect on
the environment and therefore require a full Environmental  Impact Study.
                               306

-------
 The  ERC  was  to  consider a  number  of  factors  in  making  its
decision, including:

      (a)   consistency with the General Plan and other land uses
            in the vicinity

      (b)   its effect on, and effect by, the natural environment
            (e.g., slope stability conditions, soil characteristics)

      (c)   its effect on cultural, historical,  and recreational
            sites that cannot be replaced

      (d)   its effect on visual quality (e.g.,  consideration of
            landscaping, building setbacks, etc.)

      (e)   its effect on air, water, and noise pollution

      (f)   its effect on the need for public services

 If an EIS were  required,  then  the Community  Environmental  Commission
 (CEC) was to consider the EIS and any other information it deems appro-
priate (e.g., facts brought out at a public hearing) and determine the
project's environmental impact and to either approve, conditionally
approve, or deny the project.  The decision of the CEC could have been
appealed to the City Council (after payment of a $100 fee).

 The  EIS  had  to  include in  addition  to  a description of  the project:
 (a)  a description of the environmental  setting,  (b) the environmental
 impact,   including specific listing of unavoidable  impacts as well as
 irreversible changes,  (c) mitigation measures to be taken to prevent the
environmental damage,  including evaluation of alternatives to aspects  of
the project or the project itself.

 As noted earlier,  the procedures  established  by Inglewood  permitted
 its Environmental Review Committee to conditionally approve the  initial
Environmental Clearance Statement claiming no significant environmental
 impact.   The conditions it established may have become part of a formal
negotiation process, and apparently need not have been limited to purely
environmental considerations.  An example of the conditions established
for approval  of an Environmental Clearance Statement included prohibiting
access to and from a particular street by erecting an eight-ten foot
decorative masonry wall; the full  set of conditions in one case can be
found in Addendum d.

 Prior to the  revision of the guidelines in April  1973,  eleven
public and  twenty-five private projects were subject to the EIS process.
Of the eleven public projects, three of the ElSshad to be changed as a
result of the review process, and two of these projects were modified
as a  result;  no projects were rejected.  Of the  twenty-five private
projects subject to the EIS process,  twenty Environmental  Clearance
Statements  were accepted unconditionally, three were accepted condition-
ally, and two were subject to a full  Environmental  Impact Study; no
projects were rejected.
                               307

-------
 In  February  1973.  the  Resources Agency of California  issued  its
guidelines for the implementation of the California Environmental
Quality Act  (CEQA) of  1970.  In April 1973,  the City Council  of Ingle-
wood amended its own requirements and procedures to conform to the
state's guidelines.

The procedure as  now established  requires the  Planning and Devel-
opment Director (rather than the broader-based ERC) to make the initial
decisions whether  (a) the project or activity  is not covered  by the
CEQA or Council  ordinance, (b)  exempt because the governmental action
is deemed to be either an emergency, or of a ministerial  nature, or
(c) categorically exempt.  Ministerial acts  include filing of sub-divi-
sion maps and issuing building permits — both of which had been
included in  Inglewood's EIS process prior to these revisions.  Projects
that are categorically exempt are:  (1) existing facilities which are
merely being repaired,  maintained, or altered slightly (additional
space is limited to 2500 square feet or fifty percent, whichever is
less); (2) replacement or reconstruction of  existing structures and
facilities, with substantially the same purpose and size; (3) new con-
struction of small structures (e.g., a single family home —  provided
no more than two are built — or stores and  offices designed for no
more, than twenty occupants); (4) minor alterations to land (e.g.,
grading on land with less than ten percent slope); (5) minor  altera-
tions in land use limitations — i.e., minor lot line adjustments and
set-back variances, not zoning changes which are not exempt;   (6) acces-
sory structures (such as small  parking lots, on-premise signs, drainage
projects under $10,000).  The last four categories may not be exempt if
the project  is in a particularly sensitive environment, or if the
cumulative impact of successive minor changes results in a significant
impact.  Other categorical exemptions include  information collection,
regulatory actions for protection of natural resources and for protec-
tion of the environment, Inspections, loans, and surplus government
property sales (except land).

If  the project is not exempt, the Planning and Development Director
must then decide whether the project may have possible significant
environmental effects.   If he declares that  it will not have such impact,
he  issues a Negative Declaration, which is posted and becomes final after
ten days if  it has not been appealed.  In Inglewood, appeals  are heard
by the Community Environment Commission (which is a joint group composed
of  the Planning and Zoning Board and the Constructions Appeals Board),
after a fee of $50. has been paid; their decision  may be appealed to
the City Council within ten days on payment  of a $25- fee.

The Director's decision that a project may have significant  impact
and therefore requires an Environmental Impact Report Is also appealable
under the conditions noted above.

The factors  to be considered in making the decision whether a
project may  have a significant environmental impact requiring further
study are basically the same as those the ERC was to use  In making the
same decision under  Inglewood's earlier guidelines — with the exception
                               308

-------
that assessing the project's effect on the need for public services
Is not specifically mentioned and the new language only mentions
"posing a burden on the existing street system" In its place.  Re-
ference to impacts on irreplaceable cultural, historical, and recre-
ational sites was also dropped at this decision point, but it and
the Impact of the project upon public services must be Included in
the full Environmental Impact Report, if one is required.  It should
also be noted that the guidelines specifically stated that the factors
to be considered were not to be limited to those listed.   And, also
that both primary and secondary consequences of an action are to be
considered (e.g., the consequences upon the environment of any result-
ing population growth).

If an EIR is required, the draft  (which may be made by the
developer) is circulated to interested departments and is made avail-
able to the public upon request.  Comments are to be made within thirty
days, and a final EIR is to be prepared within an additional  thirty
days.  The City then decides whether the project will or will not have
a significant effect on the environment, and whether or not to approve
the project.

An Environmental  Impact Report must  include:   (a) as the environ-
mental impact of the proposed action, including primary and secondary
impacts as well as short-term and long-term ones, at each stage —
acquisition,  construction, operation — of the project; (b) any adverse
environmental effects which cannot be avoided if the project is imple-
mented; (c)  mitigation measures proposed to minimize the impact; (d)
alternatives  to the proposed action  (including alternative mitigation
measures, and the option of having no project at all), with the reasons
for rejecting them; (e) relationship between the short-term use of the
environment and the perspective that each generation Is the trustee
of the environment for future generations; (f) any irreversible envi-
ronmental changes if the project were implemented; (g) the growth
inducing impacts of the proposed action; and (h) the boundaries of the
affected area, which actually may be quite far from the proposed site.

There has been some dissatisfaction with the EIS process in
Inglewood as  elsewhere in California.  The EIS process comes  into play
only when someone wants to do something; the decline of the environment
through inaction (e.g., deterioration of buildings) is not examined.
The EIS process requires a case by case consideration rather than the
broader approach found in general  planning considerations.   There have
also been complaints the privately produced Environmental Clearance
Statements and even full-fledged EIS reports are poorly done and even
take on the appearance of mass produced interchangeable studies, rather
than real examinations of the impact of the particular project.  The
revised guidelines in Inglewood have provisions for the city to prepare
the reports and to pass on the costs of preparations and  review unto
the applicant (this is in addition to a basic fee of $50. and any fees
for appeals).

The EIS process has also been criticized as costly and dilatory.
And it is not clear that Inglewood and other cities have  the  expertise
                                309

-------
needed to evaluate the environmental impact of a project — especially
if secondary and growth-indue ing impacts must be considered.

But the EIS process has introduced environmental considerations
into the decision making process, and has contributed to its rational-
ity and openness.
PROPERTY MAINTENANCE PROGRAM

One consequence of an increased demand for environmental action
may be that some programs which existed before (or independently of)
this demand will be relabeled as environmental management programs.
Building code requirements for landscaping, or minimum number of park-
ing spaces will be cited as environment programs.  Although Inglewood's
Property Maintenance Program could be considered a part of some other
governmental function, its contribution to stabilizing the urban envi-
ronment calls for its discussion in this report.  More importantly,
preventative programs should be considered by cities as part of their
environmental management strategy.

As part of  Inglewood's federally funded Community Review Program,
a recommendation for a Property Maintenance Program (PMP) was made and
adopted.  The PMP is an attempt at preventative medicine.  As one
Inglewood official noted, "The Environmental  Impact Statement process
works when someone wants to do something.  But there is a need for
programs to prevent later problems whose solutions will require the EIS
process."  The PMP is seen as a process to slow down the need for public
urban redevelopment projects.  It  is also hoped by Inglewood officials
that it will slow down the transition from single-family homes to apart-
ments, and perhaps aid in the stabilization of the current racial
balance.

The PMP involves inspecting building structures for their external
appearances and requiring them to  repair deteriorating conditions.  (See
Addendum d for requirements.)   The program differs from Inglewood's
program for building code enforcement in several ways:  (1) it focuses
upon external appearance rather than internal conditions such as proper
electrical wiring, (2) it utilizes the skills found in Planning Depart-
ments with  its greater neighborhood and people orientation, rather than
the more traditional building inspector who are more concerned with
safety and building code conformance, (3) it  utilizes a scheduled  in-
spection system of structures in designated neighborhoods, rather than
operating on a complaint basis.   In Inglewood, the program is admin-
istered through the Environmental  Standards Division of the Planning and
Development Department.  (See Addendum e for the citation form.)

The program is designed to have six phases each lasting two years,
resulting  in most structures being systematically inspected and rein-
spected for compliance by the end  of the program.  The first phase
involves  inspection of 2800 structures in three areas and covers approxi-
mately eighteen percent of the units scheduled to be inspected.  The cost
of the program was estimated at $60-80,000 per year.
                               310

-------
The results of the program can be easily evaluated both by a
qualitative evaluation of the improvements made as well as by a
quantitative measure of the number of buildings inspected and the
number of violations corrected.  For the first nine months of the
program 712 buildings were inspected compared to 851 buildings in
the previous 5 l/'t years which relied on building inspections ori-
ginating from a complaint.

Based on Inglewood's experience with the program, and an evaluation
by the administration, several recommendations can be made to any
city thinking of such a preventative program as part of its environ-
mental management strategy.  The program should be based upon an
analysis of the total community in terms of its social, economic, and
physical characteristics and needs.  It should proceed in phases, with
the first phase deliberately selected so that it does not include the
most blighted areas, but rather includes those most amenable to the
cosmetic changes envisioned by this program.  Nor should the initial
areas concentrate on areas predominated by one race, economic level, or
age group.   It is especially important that the initial burden not
rest with the black, the poor, or the elderly, even if those areas might
benefit most from the program.  The program requires a strong public
relations campaign to ensure enforcement and success.  Clearly the
councilmen ought to be consulted on the scheduling of the inspection
areas.  Realistically, consideration must be given to election schedules,
and where the council is selected on a district basis (rather than at-
large) consideration must be given to distributing the political  burden
of this program.

But it should be noted that the Inglewood City Council has given
the program enthusiastic support.  In part, this may be due to the
transition problems Inglewood is encountering.  The Council  is more
attuned to the needs and problems of its single-family residents,
because these are more likely to be concerned with local  government in
Inglewood.   The apartment dwellers have less identification with the
city, in part because they are newer residents, and in part because
information about the community is difficult to acquire because Inglewood
is merely one of seventy-seven cities in Los Angeles County and is
without strong local coverage (i.e., all of the TV channels — a major
source of news -- concentrate upon Los Angeles rather than the smaller
cities).  Since they do not pay property taxes directly,  nor do they
receive as many direct service (e.g., they are less likely to be aware
of trash collection problems), and since many of them work outside of
Inglewood — their concern with Inglewood government is far less than
the older Inglewood home-owner who is more directly tied to the city's
services and tax burden.  These councilmen were eager to support a pro-
gram that would maintain older neighborhoods, and contribute to both
stabilizing its racial composition as well as its home-owner composition.
                               311

-------
Based on Inglewood's experience, a city contemplating this
program should be prepared for negative feedback on other faults of
the government as well as on the program.  Some of those adversely
affected by the program may suggest that the city solve Problem X or
Problem Y rather than spend its resources on this program.  The avail-
ability of financial assistance in terms of low cost loans or of
alternate low-cost housing may play an important role in the success
of this program, as in the case of other code enforcement programs.
ORGANIZATION

The basic organizational question faced by Inglewood was where
to place the responsibilities for protecting the environment.  The
initial organization was an Environmental Standards Division (ESD)
which was formally placed within the Building Department, but whose
head reported directly to the City Manager — emphasizing the high
priority to be given this program.  A subsequent reorganization placed
the ESD (and the Building Department) within the Planning and Develop-
ment Department.

Inglewood governmental officials considered the creation of a
separate environmental department or EPA but rejected this alternative
in favor of the Planning and Development Department handling the envi-
ronmental function.  Several reasons were cited.

      1.    The City Manager wanted environmental considerations to
            become institutionalized as part of each department
            head's decision making criteria, and he felt that a
            separate department encouraged the  idea that the environ-
            ment was someone else's responsibility.  He felt that an
            administrative style of cooperation was more productive
            than one involving an adversary approach.

      2.    Concern for the environment should come early in the
            decision making process, and placement within the Plan-
            ning and Development Department facilitates this.

      3.    Planning is a vital function, which cannot be separated
            from the environment, and hence the Planning and Develop-
            ment Department should be responsible for environmental
            protection.  A separate Environment Department would
            involve considerable overlap of skills.

      k.    In addition, a new department may face additional barriers
            in  its relations with other more established departments.

      5.    It was the  feeling of the City Manager that the best source
            for environmental expertise for his administration was to
            train current staff members  rather  than hire environmenta-
            lists; current staff, and the Planning and Development
            Department, already had an appreciation for the need to
                                312

-------
            compromise between economic realities and environmental
            necessities.

      6.    Inglewood's size was small enough so that the responsi-
            bility of protecting the environment would not over-
            burden the Planning and Development Department.

An additional  organizational aspect faced by Inglewood was the
role of citizen participation in the area of environmental protection.
Here Inglewood's approach was much more traditional than some other
innovative and environmentally aggressive cities.

In August 1971, political considerations, a desire to streamline
the appeals process, and some environmental considerations led to the
dissolution of their Planning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals,
Board of Building Appeals, and Board of Fire Appeals.  Their functions
were reconstituted into a five member Planning and Zoning Board and a
five member Construction Appeals Board.  The two boards combined form
the Community Environment Commission  (CEC) which is mandated to meet
quarterly, or on the call of the chairman.  The position of CEC Chair-
man rotates quarterly between the two board chairmen.

The board members are appointed in a traditional manner -- each
councilman and the Mayor names one member of each board.  No particu-
lar emphasis is placed upon their expertise or concern for the envi-
ronment, but city officials expect the members of the CEC to grow into
the role of environmental experts.  Their role as a major mechanism
for citizen participation in the environmental  management process has
been clarified by the city's revised EIS guidelines which makes them
part of the appeals process.

In summary, the organizational  machinery adopted in Inglewood
suits its own political  and administrative style.  Any city contem-
plating organizational alternatives for its own environmental manage-
ment strategy must consider these elements too, and not merely
transplant what has proven successful elsewhere — organizational
transplants (like organ transplants) require some minimal matching of
supportive systems and behavior.
CONCLUSION

Inglewood's environmental  management program includes a  wide
range of activities, only some of which were examined in this report.
Inglewood's program began with aircraft noise pollution but soon
encompassed other sources of noise, and then other aspects of the
environment were added.  Their development of total impact analyses
and their use of the environmental  impact statement process (which
predated the state's requirement),  involves a still broader view of
the environment.  Their environmental management strategy ranges from
preventative aspects (such as the inclusion of environmental factors
into governmental planning and decision making, and programs such as
Property Maintenance) to programs of active enforcement (such as the
                             313

-------
civil and criminal suits they filed to reduce noise pollution).

The strategy evolved as a result of a number of factors.  Public
opinion was supportive — some might even say demanding -- of action
to rid Inglewood of its aircraft noise problem; and public support
continued as the program evolved.  The city's governmental decision
makers played an active role in the development of the strategy to its
present point; where they lacked expertise they moved to acquire It
through training, recruitment, or the use of consultants.  The strategy
also developed because once the city played an active role and earned
a reputation as an innovator, it strived to maintain that image.

Their program to combat noise pollution involved a wide range of
activities.  Although some of them have not been manifestly successful,
progress has been made which can be attributed to the general, con-
tinuing campaign waged by Inglewood.  The use of civil suits has been
a slow, costly, and so far unsuccessful strategy; their criminal suit
against a pilot who violated their noise ordinance while landing at
Los Angeles International Airport also proved unsuccessful.

The city is proud of its noise ordinance and it can be assumed
to be successful despite the general weaknesses of such ordinances.*
Determination to enforce clearly written standards is a major factor
in making this environmental management strategy successful.  The
other elements of their ten point program can help make Inglewood a
quieter city, when the measures are finally implemented -- either by
the city, or by the other private and public organizations that have
the authority to act.

Inglewood's Environmental Impact Statement process has proven
successful  — not so much because it has killed environmentally
damaging projects, but because it has introduced environmental con-
siderations into the decision making process of both private developers
as well as governmental decision makers.  Its most serious problem may
be the inability to accurately assess the environmental impact of a
project, given the current state of available knowledge.  Other
criticisms of the process — e.g.,  its cost, or the delay involved —
are minor, when compared to the benefits that can be gained if a project
that is potentially harmful to the environment is blocked.  But the
technique requires dedicated administrators and vigilant citizen
participation; the process can quite easily become a pro forma exercise
without these.

Preventative programs, such as Inglewood's Property Maintenance
Program, have a definite role in an environmental management strategy.
It is too early, however, to tell whether Inglewood's program will be
successful  in  improving the aesthetic environment and halting the need
*See Stuart F. Lewin, Alan H. Gordon, and Channing J. Hartelius, Law
 and the Municipal Ecology (Washington, D.C.: National Institute o1
 Municipal Law Officers, 1970).

-------
for redevelopment projects.  Since any code enforcement program
requires financial assistance to be successful, the program may face
difficulties ahead.  (See Addendum e for Notice of Property Maintenance
Violations.)
The observation has  been made several times that successful
environmental management requires programs and enforcement.  There
is no single organizational arrangement that is best for all cities.
Almost any arrangement can be made to be successful  in protecting the
environment if that goal is shared by the citizenry, and dedicated
policy makers and administrators.
                               315

-------
                                    ADDENDUM •


                   ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY GUIDELINES

                                COVER SHEET
A.
£.
C.
-D.
PREPARING AGENCY: DATE:
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT LOCATION:
PROJECT NUMBER:
STUDY REVIEW
E. ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS DIV.
F. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT:
G. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER:
DATE:
DATE:
DATE:
The Environmental Impact Statement shall contain at least the following
information;
             I.    DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT

                   a.  Purpose, function,  cost
                   b.  How will it be accomplished

                       1.  Equipment to be used
                       2.  Schedule

                   e.  Who will be affected

             II.   ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DURING CONSTRUCTION

                   a.  Short term environmental benefits
                   b.  Short term environmental degradation

             III.  ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AFTER CONSTRUCTION

                   a.  Long term environmental benefits
                   b.  Long term environmental degradation

             IV.   ALTERNATIVES (include cost impact of alternatives)

                   a.  Alternatives to project as  a whole
                   b.  Alternatives to methods of  accomplishment

             V.    TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC HEARING (if held)

             VI.   REVIEW OF PUBLIC HEARING AND DISPOSITION

             VII.  SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
                                    316

-------
                 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY GUIDELINES

                           CHECK LIST

PTOPOSE;      To insure that all important aspects of an environmental
~~~~~~       evaluation are considered.  It is an aid to insure
              necessary completeness.

PROCEDURE;    Make a check nark opposite each Item to indicate
              whether the proposed project will have an adverse
              effect, no effect,  or a beneficial effect on the
              item in question.
              Land Transformation and Construction

              a.  Compaction and Settling
              b.  Erosion
              e.  Ground Cover
              d.  Deposition (Sedimentation, Precipitation)
              e.  Stability (Slides)
              f.  Stress-Strain (Earthquake)
              g.  Floods
              h.  Waste Control
              i.  Drilling and Blasting
              j.  Operational Failure

              Land Use
                  Open Space
                  Recreational
                  Agricultural
                  Residential
                  Commercial
                  Industrial
              Water Resources

              a.  Quality
              b .  Irrigation
              c.  Drainage
              d.  Ground Water

              Air Quality

              a.  Oxides (Sulfur, Carbon,  Nitrogen)
              b,  Particulate Matter
              e.  Chemicals
              d.  Odors
              e.  Gases
t
I
ft
«
n
»
•l
<
f










^






*s









4
j
w
w
£
**
<*










*«s
**






*s,
x*




"X
^




Beneficial Effect |
-V.
^










>


_



^
X"




^-x
.X"




Adverse Effect ]
x"
•x










c






c




x


-

4J
U
U
w-t
tu
fa:
1
-^










x"
*s






x
X,




*•••*




Beneficial Effect 1
"•^










V,






x^




X*
Xj^




                                   317

-------
 E.       Service System

         a.  Schools
         b.  Police
         c.  Fire Protection
         d.  Water & Power Systems
         e.  Sewerage Systems
         f.  Refuse Disposal

 F.       Biological Conditions

         a.  Wildlife
         b.  Trees, Shrubs
         c.  Grass

 G.       Transportation Systems

         a.  Automobile
         b.  Trucking
         c.  Safety
         d.  Movement

 H.       Noise and Vibration

         a.  On-Site
         b.  Off-Site

 I        Aesthetics

         a.  Scenery
         b.  Structures

J.       Community Structure

         a.  Relocation
         b.  Mobility
         c.  Services
         d.  Recreation
         e.  Employment
         f.  Housing Quality

K.       Other (List as Appropriate)

r
U ii
£ l
**-! r
b) u
U i
V 
•D O
^i •*






^ *



^ "*




"***• ^


*•*


"^ ^






"^- -^_

r //f,
//
j_i
U -u
u
y o
GJ U
•i o
< :^







^f
v^,



^*
"****.




^^


^^


x^^"







-------
                           ADDENDUM b.


                ADVERSE IMPACT UNIT DETERMINATION


An attempt is made to quantify adverse environmental  impact of a
project.  Two factors determine the value or quantity of an adverse
impact:  the importance factor and the magnitude of adverse impact.
Magnitude multiplied by importance factor yields the "adverse
impact unit."  This unit is composed of a factual judgment (magnitude)
and a subjective judgment (importance).  The importance factor ex-
presses a preferential attitude of the author and magnitude determi-
nation guided by documented facts.

Magnitude of Adverse Impact:   1   Negligible
                               2  Small
                               3  Moderate
                               k  Considerable
                               5  Extensive
Importance Factors:   1  Slightly important (public inconvenienced;
                         short term)
                      2  Important  (controversial; hazardous;  long
                         term)
                      3  Very important (health and safety affected)
                              319

-------
ADVERSE ENVIROMMEHTAL IMPACT UNIT MATRIX FOR
      PROPOSED FRiEk'AY ALTERNATIVES


Freeway
Alternative
N-N1-N


N


H-N3-C


N-N2


C


C-C1-N


S



LEGEND: 5
3
15
ADVERSE IMPACTS
i
Socioecob
5
2
10
5
2
10
4
2
8
5
2
10
5
2
10
5
2
10
2
2
4
Noise
Church
3
3
9
3
3
9
6
3
18
3
3
9
5
3
15
3
3
9
2
3
6
School

—
—
4
3
12
•A
3
12
4
3
12
5
3
15
5
3
15
4
3
12
Hospital
4
3
12
4
3
12
— —
—
~
• •.
—
—
— ^
—
—
• •.
—
—
..
--
--
H
&
3
3
9
3
3
9
_ _
—
—
3
3
9
3
3
9
3
3
9
3
3
9
Air
1
4
3
12
4
3
12
«•»
—
._
2
3
6
3
3
9
4
3
12
4
3
12
School

—
«
3
3
9
4
3
12
4
3
12
5
3
15
5
3
15
4
3
12
Hospital
5
3
15
5
3
15
••«
—
~
•»*»
—
—
««
—
--
_ _
—
—

—
~

Traffic
4
2
8
4
2
0
3
2
6
4
2
8
2
2
4
3
2
6
1
2
2

Seismic
3
3
9
3
3
9
2
3
6
3
3
9
2
3
6
2
3
6
1
3
3


Total
Adverse Impact
Units


84


105


62


75


83


83


60
Magnitude
Importance factor
Impnct unit
                 320

-------
                                     IMPACT KATIHC SHEET




                          (Completed Sasplei  Water Treatoent Plant)
tffeet
?o«ltlve Social Effects
1. Improved vater quality
2.
3.
Total

Positive Environmental Effect!
1.
2.
3.
Total

Negative Social Effects
I. Selocation of 1 family
2. Relocation of 2
businesses
3.
"Total

Negative Environmental Effects
1. Boise & dust (plant
construct ion)
2. • Noise & dust (pipeline
construction)
3', Air pollution from
electricity generation
Total

Magnitude
395 million people-
days (present value)








2.5 people (equivalent
63 people (equivalent]



15,000 people days
(equivalent)
2,000 people days
20,000 people days
(present value)

Inportance
Factor
0.1









*t*« •
16.7



1.2 (park
(attected)
1.3 (resi-
dences arrected
1.2


lupact
Units
39.5 Billion


39.5 Billion






42
1,052

1,094

18,000
2,600
24,000
44,600

Economic Value of ona Impact unit:    $2.50 per  person-day (equivalent)
Economic benefits




Social benefits



Environmental btnlita






     Total Benefits






Economic costs




Social costs



Environmental costs






     Total Cos 1^5
                          $   SB. 750-000
                                                     $    9R.7W OP"
                               8,000,000
                                   2,735
                                111,500
                                                               .-,!"
                                                     $    8.114,235
                                             1-4
                                      321

-------
                           ADDENDUM c.
               ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE STATEMENT
      APPLICANT:

      Name
      Address
      Telephone
      PROJECT LOCATION:

      Address
      ZONE:
2.    OWNER:

      Name
      Address
      Telephone
      Legal  Description
      PROJECT TYPE (i.e., residential, commercial, industrial  or
                    other) Specify:	
6.    PROJECT VALUE (excluding land):_

7.    PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS:

           a.  Square footage of site
           b.  Square footage of buildings (
               (including garages)

           c.  Land coverage (as % of "7a")
           d.  Landscaped area (as % of "7a")

           e.  Number of stories            _

           f.  BuiIding height              _

           g.  Number of parking stalls
           h.  Number of dwelling units (res. only)

           i.  Recreation area (as % of "7a")   	
                              322

-------
                                                         YES      NO

8.    Does your project comply with all  pertinent
      rules and regulations of the Los Angeles APCD?     	      	

9.    Will your project require that heavy trucks or
      equipment use streets other than designated
      truck routes (after construction completed?)       	      	

10.   Will your proposed project require any pickups
      or deliveries between the hours of 10 PM and
      7 AM?                                              	      	

11.   Does your project include any machinery,
      loudspeaker, or other equipment that will be
      audible beyond your property line?                 	      	

12.   Does your project include any equipment that
      may generate dust, fumes, odors, smoke, or
      steam noticeable beyond your property line?        	      	

13-   Does your project consume any existing open
      space in Inglewood?                                	      	

14.   Will any construction acgivity take place
      between the hours of 10 PM and 7 AM?               	      	

15-   Will the project result in any significant
      increase in traffic or parking on any city
      streets?                                           	      	

16.   Are there any other significant short-term
      environmental impacts of this project?             	      	

17-   Are there any other significant long-term
      environmental impacts of this project?             	      	

      I  certify that the above facts are true and correct and  recognize
      that development in Inglewood must comply with all  City  of Inglewood
      ordinances and codes as well as all rules and regulations of the
      Los Angeles Air Pollution Control  District.
      (Signature of Applicant)               (Date)
       I  concur with the above facts and find  that this project will  not
       have a significant effect on the environment provided the con-
       ditions listed below are met.
                              323

-------
 I  concur with the above facts and find that this project may
 have a significant effect on the environment.  An Environmental
 Impact Statement is required.

 I  do not concur with the above facts for the reasons stated
 below.  An Environmental Impact Study is required.
Chairman, Environmental Review Committee    (Date)
                         32k

-------
                           ADDENDUM d.

       CONDITIONS REQUIRED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
                             AND THE
                 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
                               FOR
                   EXPANSION OF AUTO SALES LOT
1.    That the applicant construct a decorative masonry wall  8 to 10
      feet in height along the entire Maple Street frontage,  set back
      a distance of 5 feet from the property line with a setback at
      the north end and south end compatible with the existing resi-
      dential setback.  The design of the wall, the height of the wall
      and the length and design of the transitions at the north and
      south ends shall be subject to the approval of the Planning and
      Development Director and the Police Department.

2.    That applicant provide a wall not less than 6 feet in height
      between the property northward and the property southward.  The
      material and height of the wall shall be approved by the Planning
      and Development Director.

3.    That a 5 foot landscaped setback from the west property line shall
      be provided and supplied with an appropriate irrigation system.
      Minimum landscaping acceptable shall include ground cover and 15
      gallon grees at 50 foot intervals.  Landscape plans indicating
      the type and placement of plant material and the design of the
      irrigation system are subject to approval by the Planning and
      Development Director.

4.    That the Maple Street parkway shall be landscaped with  trees and
      appropriate ground cover and maintained by the property owner.
      Landscape plans indicating the type of plant material  and the
      design of the Irrigation system are subject to approval by the
      Planning and Development Director.

5.    That grading, paving and marking of the lot be according to re-
      quirements of the Inglewood Municipal Code.

6.    The lighting plan for the property including the height of the
      light standards shall be subject to approval by the Planning and
      Development Director.  There shall be no direct illumination of
      adjacent residential areas.

7.    That no access or egress shall be permitted to the property from
      Maple Street.

8.    That all curb-cuts on Maple Street are to be closed and matched
      with existing curb, gutter and sidewalk.  Construction  shall be
      to the standards required by the City Engineer.
                              325

-------
9.    That no advertising signs shall  be installed on  the Maple
      Street frontage.

10.   That the Traffic Engineer review the traffic patterns  in the
      area and install all  appropriate control  devices.

11.   That the noise levels resulting  from any  activity  on the site
      shall not exceed 50 dBA at the nearest property  line of any
      residential property.

12.   That the applicant shall  at his  expense construct  a storm
      drain on 98th Street from Maple  to La Brea.   The storm drain
      shall be approved by the City Engineer.

13-   That the applicant provide access gates for  emergency vehicles
      at the end of each alley abutting the property.   The design
      and construction of the gates shall be approved  by the Fire
      Chief.
                              326

-------
                             ADDENDUM e.
                          CITY OF inGLewooo cauFomia
                                  NOTICE  OF
                 PROPERTY MAINTENANCE VIOLATIONS
Addres»
                                                    Dtte
Pursuant to the Property Maintenance ordinance, an inspection was  made of
your property and the following deficiencies as checked off were  found to
•xist:

( )  1.  Abandoned, boerded-up or partially destroyed building,
         Sec. 9601(a)(o)(r-ix)

( )  2.  Unpainted buildings causing dry rot and termite infestation.
         Sec. 9601(b)(o}

( )  3.  Broken window constituting a hazard.  Sec.  9601(c)(o)

( )  4.  Overgrown vegetation.  Sec. 9601(d)(o)

( )  5.  Storage of vehicles in front yard area.   Sec.  9601(f)(o)

( )  6.  Dead trees, weeds and debris.  Sec. 9601(e)

( )  7.  Abandoned .chicles.  Sec.  9601 (g)(o-ii)

( )  8.  Discarded furniture.  Sec. 9601(i)(o-ii)

( )  .9.  Garbage cans stored so visible from the  street.  Sec. 9601 (k)(o)

( ) 10.  Structurally dilapidated,  in need of repairs.   Sec.  9£01(m)(o)

( ) 11.  Violates fire resistive wall requirements.   Sec.  9601(r-xv)

( ) 12.  Other	
Remarks
These conditions constitute a Public Nuisance.   Corrective  measures must be
commenced within          days and completed within  	days.  Otherwise
the matter will be turned over to the  City Attorney for  either  misdemeanor
or civil action.
Questions concerning the above  should  be  addressed  to  the  Building  Division
at 674-7111, Ext.  274 between 8:00 a.m.  to 5:00  p.m.
BuildingInspector
Building Division
Planning and Development Department
Inglewood,  California
                                                     OFFICE  USE  ONLY
                                            "Property  Owner_
                                             Address        ~
Contacts
                            327

-------
                            APPENDIX /»


          REPORT ON THE FIELD TRIP TO MIAMISBURG, OHIO


 Introduction
Miamisburg is a small city (14,935 population)  lying on the banks of
the Great Miami River on the southern edge of the Dayton metropolitan
area.  Rapid growth is transforming Miamisburg  from a small independent
town to a larger suburban community.  Growth trends for the entire
metropolitan area indicate continued rapid expansion for the area south
of Dayton, as completion of Interstate 75 makes commuting into Dayton
for work much more convenient.

Since 1968, the primary orientation of the City of Miamisburg has been
toward preparing for the anticipated growth.  A pro-annexation policy
has resulted in adding 233 acres for a total of 7-5 square miles, and
the city is straining to provide the essential  capital  improvements.
Anticipation of growth relates to a growing concern over environmental
quality on the part of the citizens, their local elected officials and
the municipal staff.  The press of  immediate problems has required that
long-term planning efforts be carried out at the same time that new pro-
grams are being implemented.

In the last few years, the City of Miamisburg initiated the following
environmental programs:

      ^Comprehensive Planning.  In November 1969 the Comprehensive
      Development Plan was adopted as a standard for future planning.

      ^Mayor's Beautification Committee.  A 15-member committee whose
      primary mission  is to develop and recommend to the city council
      programs designed to improve the city's appearance and physical
      environment was established.

      *Solid Waste.  Plastic trash can liner program was initiated
      where bags could be obtained from city building or boy scouts
      at $3.00 for fifty bags.

      In July, 1970 the city put  into effect a more efficient system
      of collection routes  in conjunction with a new refuse storage
      and collection ordinance.   Recently, the city switched to
      specially designed one-man  vehicles for refuse collection.

      In early 1970 they began using South Montgomery County Reduction
      plant  (annual cost $42,000)  to dispose of trash rather than land-
      fill method  ($7.90/ton).
                               328

-------
      "Water.  In February, 1970 a 25 year Wastewater Treatment Master
      Plan was adopted.

      In May, 1970 the city authorized a $2,000 voluntary contribution
      to the Miami Conservancy District for a demonstration and study
      of oxygen aerators for the Great Miami River.

      In September, 1969 new chlorination facilities were added to the
      city wastewater treatment plant, providing compliance with state
      and federal water standards (2.2 mgpd capacity).

      A one million gallon water tank was built to insure adequate
      emergency water storage.

      A section of trunk sewer was completed, thus eliminating two lift
      stations which were sources of pollution.

      "Open Space.  A Master Park Acquisition Plan was adopted.

      In May, 1971 the Council established a "park fee" to be paid on
      each building permit issued for the construction of a residential
      structure in the City (see Addendum B).

      An abandoned sewage treatment plant was converted into a park.

While it is important to do everything possible within a single community
to alleviate environmental problems, many transcend local political
boundaries and many require solutions that exceed the capacity of any
single jurisdictions.  Briefly, the primary environmental problems facing
the City of Miamisburg and the entire metropolitan areas as identified
chiefly by the "State of the Environment" report issued by the Miami
Valley Regional  Planning Commission, are:

      Water Pollution— The major sources of pollution for the Great
      Miami 'River are industrial  and municipal  discharges (treated and
      untreated).  In the past the BOD level has failed to meet estab-
      lished standards.  However, water quality has consistently improved
      since I960.  Another pollution threat is  that of toxic waste
      spills.  One paper company was fined $60,000 for damages resulting
      from such a spi11.

      Air Pollution— The most serious air pollution problem is dust-
      fall  and suspended particulates, the latter emanating from
      industries and steam-electric plants.  At major street inter-
      sections,  the level  of carbon monoxide exceeds state standards.
      Other standards may be violated near major emission sources. The
      trend over the past few years has been a  dramatic decrease in
      most  types of air pollution.

      Sol id Waste — Solid waste disposal is particularly important
      because of its potential for contaminating the ground water, the
                              329

-------
      source of the area's drinking water.  The problem is finding a
      means of disposal with minimal environmental  impact.

      Unregulated Growth -- Urban sprawl threatens  to become more
      serious resulting in the risk of losing valuable agricultural
      land and natural areas.

When seeking solutions to problems such as these that are common to this
regional area, it is necessary to consider what is  called the Miami Valley
Region.   The Region covers 2,300 square miles and nearly one million
people.   There are five counties in the area recognized as the Miami
Valley;  16 cities; 5^ villages; 69 townships; 65 school districts, and
48 other special  purpose districts -- a total of 252 separate jurisdic-
tions.

The remainder of this report then focuses on some of the key environ-
mental programs in the Miami Valley and the various regional arrange-
ments utilized to implement them.  These include:  (l) the Miami
Conservancy District, which was created in 191^ in  response to a
disastrous flood and which has extended its functions to include water
quality; (2) the Montgomery County Combined General Health District, a
single agency covering five counties for combatting air pollution;  (3)
the Montgomery County Sanitation Department, which provides county-wide
incineration for refuse; (4) the Monsanto Research Corporation Mound
Laboratory, which in cooperation with the Atomic Energy Commission,
attempts to neutralize its own impact on the environment; and,  (5) the
Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission, which serves to coordinate
the environmental efforts of a five-county area.  When there is a
proliferation of governmental jurisdictions  in an area, as  is often the
case in many metropolitan areas, the effectiveness  of  individual units
to meet environmental problems is limited.  Service levels and tax
burdens vary, economies of scale are unrealized, and often the jurisdic-
tion is not large enough to encompass the source of pollution.  In the
Miami Valley there has been  increasing emphasis on regional approaches
to solving environmental problems.
THE MIAMI CONSERVANCY DISTRICT

In the spring of 1913 from 9 to 11 inches of rain fell on the Miami
Valley over a five day period.  The resulting destruction of the 1913
flood to the communities built in the flood plains totaled over 300
people dead and property damage of $100 million plus.

The first order of business, once some seeming normalcy was established
was to work together to form a protective plan which would end flood
threats.  Over 23,000 citizens of the valley raised  in excess of $2
million  in cash for flood control.

There were two major institutional changes resulting from the disaster.
First, citizens formed a counci1-manager government  in the City of Dayton.
                               330

-------
Second, in response to public demand, a special  session of the Ohio
legislature was called in 191^ which enacted the Ohio Conservancy Act,
the basis for creating conservancy districts throughout Ohio.

Founded in 1915 under the Conservancy Act to combat area flooding, the
Miami Conservancy District was created as a political subdivision of
the State of Ohio.  It had the power to levy assessments, borrow money,
condemn land to provide flood protection, and plan, construct  and main-
tain structures.  The Conservancy District does  not have the power to
enforce regulations or to prosecute violators; State and local enforce-
ment agencies perform these functions.  The District's area of concern
is defined not by county, city or township lines, but by the geographical
watershed of the streams and rivers involved.

Responsibility for the District is in the hands  of the Conservancy Court,
which is made up of nine common pleas judges; one each from the Ohio
counties included:  Butler, Clarke, Greene, Hamilton, Miami, Montgomery,
Preble, Shelby, and Warren.  A three-man board of directors is appointed
by the Court to supervise the development and execution of the District's
activities and responsibilities.  These men appoint an operating staff
for day to day management.

Originally the Conservancy District had responsibility only for flood
control.  The flood control plan they developed  provides protection from
a storm kO percent greater than the 1913 storm.   Five large earthen dams
on the main stem of the Great Miami and four of  its tributaries (Laramie,
Stillwater, Twin Creek, Mad), together with levees and channel improve-
ment in the major cities of Miami, Montgomery, and Butler counties,
provide the residential and commercial communities with as effective a
flood protection system as may be found anywhere in the U. S.

The original Miami system was completed in 1922  at a cost of $38 million.
Areas which were rural in 1915 but are urban today have since  asked to
participate in the district and have been extended protection.  Since
World War II, $12 million in flood control has been added.

The Conservancy District flood protection goal yet to be achieved is the
purchase of all the land in the flood plains.  In addition to  providing
added protection from floods, this would provide a related recreational
benefit.  Even now, since the dams are "dry" dams (only storing water
during floods), the wooded areas on the upstream side of the dams are
leased to the Montgomery County Park District for recreational use.

The Miami Conservancy District broadened its scope when it became directly
involved in water quality after passage of the national water  quality act
in 1965.  A committee was formed under the sponsorship of the  Dayton
Chamber of Commerce representing all  permit holders, including industries,
counties and municipalities, as an act of resistance to the standards
proposed for the Miami River.  The District served in a technical advisory
capacity to this committee.
                              331

-------
In 1967 the Conservancy District was charged by the State of Ohio with
responsibility for planning, developing and guiding an effective pro-
gram for improving water quality in the District's watershed.  The
work to date has been financed mainly by six counties and 53 industries
and municipalities holding Ohio permits to discharge wastes Into the
Great Miami River and its tributaries.  In addition, substantial Federal
funds were provided in the form of a grant from the Federal Water Quality
Administration.  A three year study resulted in the following program
recommendations:  (1) water quality management; (2) stream appearance;
(3) in-stream aeration; (4) low flow augmentation;  (5) regional treat-
ment of non-aqueous wastes; and, (6) regional wastewater treatment.

      1.  The Water Quality Management Program has been functioning
          since 1967.  It involves water measurement, testing and
          analysis.  It provides the data on which other water-related
          judgments and recommendations have been made.  The District
          has set up 36 sampling stations along the Miami River and
          its tributaries.  Six of these are monitored continuously
          and the remainder are sampled only periodically.  In addi-
          tion samples are taken at 60 outfalls on the river at random
          intervals throughout the year (more samples are taken by the
          U. S. Geological Survey and the State Natural Resources
          Department).

          Stream survey data collected by the District as part of the
          sampling network is analyzed and computerized to develop a
          mathematical description or "model" of the river.  Data in
          the model includes temperature, dissolved oxygen, stream
          flow, environmental conditions, and the  like.  By altering
          one of the variables, the model will describe changes in
          the total river.  Thus, the model  is valued as a planning
          tool.

      2.  The stream appearance program is being pursued  in several
          ways, including contacting those landowners and operators
          permitting or contributing to undesirable stream appearance.
          The regulatory and enforcement powers of the State (Division
          of Wildlife) or local law enforcement agencies  (as In the
          case of zoning) are enlisted when  necessary.   In the summer
          teenagers are employed to clean up along  the river.

      3.  The first mechanical aerator was put in operation on the river
          In the summer of 1970.  Since then two more have been added.
          In essence, the aerators work like a giant eggbeater, stirring
          up the water and exposing  It to the air.  Transfer of oxygen
          to the water not only helps sustain aquatic populations, but
          also aids the natural decomposition process.  Experimentation
          with other methods of aeration, such as air  injection and pure
          oxygen transfer,  Is also planned.

      4.  Studies show that adding water to  the Great Miami River at
          Dayton during the dry season to maintain  a  rate of flow of at
                               332

-------
least 600 cubic feet per second would help maintain required
water quality standards.  Boosting the flow of the river
would be needed only during that part of the year when the
stream cannot flow at this rate unassisted.  All other things
being equal, the greater the volume and velocity of the flow,
the more effective the stream's ability to assimilate wastes
and the faster high-temperature effluents are cooled.   The
Ohio Water Pollution Control Board has required that low flow
augmentation be included in any water quality plan proposed
for the Great Miami River Basin,

The development of regional facilities for the collection and
destruction of non-aqueous liquid residuals, e.g., gasoline,
oil, paints, solvents, etc., is essential for any plan to
maintain water quality.  Private enterprise is currently being
encouraged to develop appropriate treatment facilities.  Fail-
ing this, the District plans to undertake the task.

In 1968 the City of Franklin, Ohio, approached the District
for assistance.  They were under orders to clean up their
effluent discharge.  The problem was compounded by five paper
mills also discharging in the same area.  The District con-
structed an area wastewater treatment plant near Franklin to
serve the city and its five paper mills and capacity to serve
an area of 75 square miles.  By agreement, Franklin collects
the wastewater, regulates discharges into the system,  and
delivers it to the plant, which is operated by the District.

Design criteria for such regional water treatment facilities
include ability to accommodate changing loads, variable
stream conditions, new water quality standards, increased
user participation, and the latest technological techniques.
There are financial savings also due to a single location,
lower total equipment cost, lower costs for power and  chemi-
cals, a centralized laboratory and a smaller highly qualified
staff.

The Franklin Environmental  Control Complex.  The wastewater
treatment facility in Franklin is unique for several reasons.
For one thing, it is built adjacent to and designed to com-
plement a solid waste recovery and disposal facility (also
located on District-owned land).  The two waste facilities
work together in a mutually supportive manner:  as one treats
wastewater including the wastewater from the recycling plant,
the other disposes of solid waste, including recovered waste
material (sludge) from wastewater treatment.  Also, the
purified effluent from the wastewater plant is used as the
process and cooling water supply for the solid waste plant,
and the ash from the solid waste plant is used as a settling
agent in the wastewater clarifier (See Figure I).   Project
engineers estimate that this relation reduced capital  costs
alone by
                    333

-------
   o
   o
   o
   o
— CC


UJ Z
cc. o
=> <_)
u. <
   o
   a:
                                                                                                                                       c

                                                                                                                                       (0
                                                                                                                                       Q-
                                                                                                                                       C

                                                                                                                                       O
                                                                                                                                       2
                                                                                                                                       (0
                                                                                                                                       o
                                                                                                                                       (0
                                                                                                                                       4)


                                                                                                                                       I-
                                                                                                                                       o
                                                                                                                                       in
                                                              33^

-------
Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant.  The wastewater treatment
plant has a capacity of 4.5 million gallons per day (mgd) and
is currently handling about 2.5 mgd.  The effluent entering
the plant (approximately 1100 pm) averages five times the
strength of "normal" raw sewage.  The lowest recorded removal
rate was 93-5%.

The plant is completely automated, requiring only one operator
approximately 30 hours per week.  Sampling and monitoring is
tied into a computer at the District's headquarters in Dayton.
All critical plant functions are alarmed, with any failure
activating a self-dialing telephone to the police dispatcher.
There are complete backup systems, including standby generators.
Should an emergency arise putting a primary clarifier out of
service, the system is set up so that the entire flow can be
diverted to the other clarifier.  If both clarifiers should
malfunction, wastewater can be diverted directly into one of
the three aeration basins.  There is n£ bypass available
allowing untreated wastes to discharge directly into the Great
Miami River.  (See Figure 2.).

The Hydrasposal/Fibredaim Sol id Waste Recycling Plant.   To
meet an immediate problem in disposing of its solid wastes and
to accommodate its future needs, the City of Franklin, Ohio
embarked on a plan with a private business, the Black Clawson
Company, to build a solid waste recovery plant.  The idea for
the plant was Initiated by a Franklin City Councilman employed
by Black Clawson.

The plant was constructed under a two-thirds grant from the
Bureau of Solid Waste Management, U. S.  Public Health Service,
HEW (now the office of Solid Waste Management Programs,  EPA).
Ground-breaking ceremonies were held in September, 1970 and
the plant went into operation in mid-June, 1971-  The plant is
being operated by Black Clawson Fibreclaim, Inc.,  under a
management contract with the city.

The plant is designed to handle a capacity of 150 tons per day.
However, they are currently operating at the level of 50 tons
per day.  Private haulers bring refuse to the plant and are
charged $6.50 per ton for disposal.   Through a variety of
processes, the plant then separates ferrous metals, aluminum,
glass and paper fibres for reuse.  The non-recoverable organic
materials, plus the sewage sludge, is fed into an  incinerator
for burning.  Non-recoverable inorganic materials  are taken to
a landfill (see Figure 3 for a breakdown on the types of
materials treated and their final disposition).

To control its own environmental Impact, the facilities  were
located on a large tract of ground on the outskirts of Franklin.
A high volume air sampler Is located nearby to test the air
                     335

-------
                          FIGURE 2

                  FRANKLIN AREA WASTEWATER
                 TREATMENT SYSTEM SITE PLAN
     No.  1
Aeration Basins
     No. 2
No. 3
                      0-
                                              •Aerators
Primary
Building
Hydraposal/
Fibreclaim
Plant
                                           Secondary Clarifiers

                                            econdary Bui Id ing
                               Chlorination Tank
                                 Outlet
                                               •Sea 1 e
                                               Great
                                               Miami River
     SOURCE:  Miami Conservancy District
                              336

-------
                               FIGURE 3
                 	--zur.	 nr:_j
                  HYDRASPOSAL/FIBRECLAIM MATERIAL BALANCE
    DELIVER
LBS.   MATERIAL
25



10

 8


17
40
PAPER
00
                        PROCESS
    RETURN TO

ATMOSPHERE
         LAND
      YARD WASTES
      TEXTILES
                                                  3I.5(ENERGY)
                                                            5.5(ASH)
                                                                       RECYCLE
                                                              0.5 (ALUM.)
                                                                 (IRON)

                                                                 (GLASS)
                                           56.5
      15.0
                                                                        (PAPER)
                                                                    28.5    100
                                JALANCE
                    HYDRASPOSAL/ FIBRECLAIM
       SOURCE: The Black Clawson Company
                                   337

-------
          quality.  And, test wells are used to sample ground water for
          contamination.  These wells found some Initial contamination,
          but this no longer seems to be a problem.

          The City of Mlamisburg and the Miami Conservancy District are
          jointly studying the feasibility of connecting the Miamisburg
          wastewater plant to the Franklin regional plant for excess
          flows above the design capacity of the Miamisburg plant and
          for sludge disposal.

Additional tasks in the water quality area that the District is undertaking
are:  (1) building and operating two additional regional treatment plants,
and (2)  studies of landfill contamination of ground water and the movement
of pollution In aquifers.

Money to operate District programs comes from three sources.  Flood con-
trol funds are obtained via a property tax long collected for District
by the County Auditors.  Water quality programs are funded by fees
charged  the discharge permit holders.  And wastewater treatment costs,
e.g., the Franklin plant, are charged to the users through the City.

The example of the Conservancy District Is an important one for the region
because of the pattern of intergovernmental cooperation it has been
setting for nearly sixty years.  The philosophy of the District has been
to restrict itself to the field of water management, to avoid duplication
of efforts, and to act as a service agency or resource for businesses and
governments.

District General Manager L. Bennett Coy admitted that "minor" conflicts
exist, certainly.  "Sometimes regional planners act as though they were
the real professionals in the water field — knowing the best treatment
for a given area — controlling population growth by suggesting negative
action on sewer and water applications...  On the other hand cities often
ignore the possibilities of real benefits by regional or sub-regional
action — particularly in the waste treatment and water supply areas...
Similarly, special districts, with their highly technical staffs may take
positions in areas well beyond their expertise and capability, particularly
in regard to population shifts and matters allied to water use, but beyond
their jurisdiction.

"But  in our area, in the Miami Valley, we have found a way to overcome
most, if not all, of those problems.  Basically, and for lack of a better
phrase,  we have evolved, by trial and error, a relationship that may be
termed comparable to that of a "consenting adult" situation.  We do things
together that may not be well covered by law, but that, in the long run,
are for the general good of the area and certainly beneficial to the
participants."  For example, the District provides comments on all water-
sewer applications via the A-95 process conducted through two of the re-
gional planning agencies in the Miami Valley.  Also, the District, with
information provided by cities, counties and regional agencies, developed
                                338

-------
the Water Quality  Improvement Plan for the Great Miami River.

In the few years the Miami Conservancy District has had responsibility
for water quality, a totally integrated wastewater planning and management
system has not been achieved.  However, the trend has been toward develop-
ing a coordinated  regional program, and substantial progress has been made
through the development of a regional plan and construction of regional
facilities.

As the regional wastewater system continues to develop, it is not yet
certain what the institutional  framework wi11  be.  Recent federal legis-
lation (Section 208 of the 1972 Water Pollution Control Act Amendments)
encourages regional systems.  However, both the special districts, e.g.,
the Miami Conservancy District, and the regional councils, e.g., the
Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission, are competing for the role.
MONTGOMERY COUNTY COMBINED GENERAL HEALTH DISTRICT

At one time each township, village and city in Montgomery County had its
own health officer, who, on a part-time basis, carried out many of the
same functions that a sanitation inspector performs today.  In 1918 the
State adopted legislation allowing the formation of General Health Dis-
tricts as political subdivisions of the State of Ohio with responsibility
for health functions.  The General  Health Districts are governed by an
advisory board consisting of representatives from member townships, villages,
and cities.  The advisory commission appoints a 5-member board of health.
In the Miami Valley the larger incorporated urban areas generally created
their own health agencies, while the Montgomery County General Health Dis-
trict covered the remainder of the area.

In 1956 the first air pollution regulation in the area was designed for
the City of Dayton.  At that time,  neither business nor government seemed
too interested in taking preventative measures against air pollution.
Dayton's interest stemmed from attempts to curb the emissions from their
incinerator.  They eventually assembled a three-person staff located in
the Department of Services and Buildings.  This staff served as technical
resources in the area for several years.

The Montgomery County General Health District passed its first air pollution
regulations in I960 and began a modest enforcement program.  This was done
to provide uniform standards for area inside the County as well as the City,
as the City began to move against some asphalt plants.

When the Clean Air Act of 1963 was passed, grants became available for
training on air pollution.  This enabled the Health District staff to gain
valuable expertise of their own.

In 1967 Montgomery County became one of the first counties in Ohio to study
air pollution.  Beginning with an initial grant of $20,000 ($15,000 in-kind)
from the County and $5,000 from the City of Dayton, a $75,000 federal grant
was received for a two year study identifying local air pollution problems.
                               339

-------
As a result of the 1967 Clean Air Act, the Air Pollution Control  Section
of the Health District was able to develop several programs aimed at
controlling and reducing air pollution.  One of the first actions was to
purchase a mobile trailer to be used as a testing laboratory.  Today
there are six mobile laboratories and 64 sampling stations.  The sampling
stations are located on public sites such as fire stations or schools
throughout the region.

In March, 1971 the Combined General Health District was formed as agree-
ments were reached with five counties — Montgomery, Miami, Greene, Clarke,
and Preble -- and the City of Dayton, to provide an air pollution program.
Subsequently the size of the Montgomery County Combined General Health
District health board was expanded to nine members — five from Dayton.
While these counties have centralized health functions in County Health
Districts, most of the larger cities retained their health boards.  Thus
each policy change made by the Combined Health District must receive
approval from each of the city and health district boards.  A few commu-
nities, e.g., Oakwood, have maintained their own staff.  However, they
still contract with the Montgomery County Combined Health District for the
air pollution control program (See  AddendumC) .

Originally Health District funding was principally charges levied against
member jurisdictions.  This limited source of revenue permitted few
extensive or new programs.  The development of the successful air pollu-
tion control programs by the Montgomery County Combined Health District
was dependent upon outside funding.  The current budget provides for a
staff of approximately 30 and a total budget of approximately three-
quarters of a million dollars.

Based on air pollution data compiled over the years, the level of pollution
has decreased in virtually every category.  Compliance has generally been
achieved without major litigation, although often hearings before the
board were necessary to confirm intent to enforce the standards.

Perhaps one of the most innovative and unique efforts within the Regional
Air Pollution Control Agency is an unusual combination of law enforcement
and ecology that has resulted in an environmental patrol program.  The
overall strategy of the program has been to teach policemen to become
environmentalists.  Experienced police officers with an interest  in eco-
logy are trained to deal with violations of the "environment".  Wearing
green uniforms with an ecology patch on one sleeve and a gun on one hip,
the environmental policemen patrol several neighboring counties watching
out for flagrant environmental violations such as illegal dumping or
potential health hazards such as rabid dogs.  They  issue citations similar
to parking tickets that warn the abuser to correct the violation within
five days or else appear in court.  Although the  Idea of gun-toting
environmentalists disturbed quite a few individuals, the psychological
effect of the men in green appearing before community groups and schools
voicing the  legal aspect of ecology, has strengthened their role  in the
protection  of the environment.
                               340

-------
What has been responsible for the success of this program?  Perhaps the
most important factor has been the leadership and support of local offi-
cials.   Officials have backed up the enforcement efforts in the face of
charges that industries would be forced to leave town or shut down.
Second, there has been widespread public support from both the business
community and citizen groups.  Movement within the citizens of the Mont-
gomery County area began with the efforts of the local Tuberculosis
Association and gradually expanded into what is now called CAC — Citizens
for Cleaner Air Committee.  CAC has encouraged stronger regulations.  In
addition, the Chamber of Commerce became supportive of the air pollution
program.  A third positive factor is the ordinance itself, which is
reported to be one of the strongest in the Nation.   Finally, the ability
to address the problem of air pollution on a regional basis has increased
effectiveness.
MONTGOMERY COUNTY SANITATION DEPARTMENT

Until three years ago, solid waste in Miamisburg and most of Montgomery
County was disposed by means of landfills.  As early as 1956, however,
improper landfill operation and a dwindling supply of available land led
county officials to consider other alternatives.  Public concern,  spurred
by newspaper coverage, developed over the threat of ground water contami-
nation from landfills.  This had major implications for all localities,
since virtually all of the drinking water in the area comes from under-
ground rivers.

At the same time the county began investigating incineration, the City of
Dayton decided that their own incinerator needed to be replaced.  Subse-
quently, a consultant study for the Montgomery County Health Department
led to the recommendation that a county-wide disposal system be established
where solid waste would be collected and transported via transfer stations
to incinerators for disposal.  It was further recommended that the incin-
erators be owned and operated by the county because of their greater
borrowing power.  Finally, the study proposed that two incinerators be
constructed initially.

A companion study was conducted to determine the equitable locations for
the incinerators.  Essentially it recommended that one be located in the
north and one in the south.  The precise location became quite a political
issue, as no community wanted the incinerator within their boundaries,
but they did want it to be convenient for lower transportation costs.
Eventually, one was located in the county and the other in the City of
Moraine.  The site selected in the City of Moraine was predominantly
industrial land that had been reclaimed from a landfill.  In return for
accepting an incinerator, Moraine received a new road.

The system was designed in 1958 and was later updated to anticipated EPA
standards.  Construction began in 1967 and operation began in 1970.  Cost
of the capital facilities totaled approximately $8 million.  Once the
plant was constructed, the County Health Department began closing land-
fills.  Currently all landfills in the County are closed except for three
                                  341

-------
that can accept no domestic waste.  One of the primary sources of con-
tention came from the private haulers, because it increased their
operating cost.  Private haulers remain one of the major problems facing
the system today.  It is known that some garbage is transported out of
the county for disposal.  The County receives assistance from most
municipalities in enforcing the incineration law, and the County even
trails garbage trucks with an airplane in an attempt to reduce the
"bootlegging."

The incinerators have a capacity for 300 tons per day each, with built-in
expansion capability.  Currently the north plant is operating at 50 per-
cent of capacity and the south plant at around 90 percent.   The large
difference in utilization reflects a much more rapid growth In the
southern section of the metropolitan area than was anticipated.  It is
estimated the system handles 75 percent of the petrucible garbage in the
county.  Approximately a 90 percent reduction is achieved.

The originally cost of refuse disposal at the incinerator was $3-50 per
ton.  Until recently haulers were charged $7-90 per ton.  Now, however,
the rates have increased dramatically to $12.50 per ton.  Plus, the
county subsidizes the operation k2 cents on every ton.

The system is operated by the County Sanitation Department, under service
agreements with the local governments in the County (see the attached
agreement, Addendum d, between the City of Miamisburg and Montgomery
County).  Generally, the agreements cover all solid waste with the
possible exception of some materials that are part of recycling programs.
For example, the cities of Oakwood and Miamisburg shred brush or old
Christmas trees for use as mulch, and Oakwood also collects newspapers
separately and sells them for recycling (thus far the returns from the
sale has been sufficient to meet operating costs).  Seven of thirteen
municipalities in the County have formal contracts.  The remaining six
cities participate and pay on a fee basis.  The cost per ton is the same.

The agreements also provide for an Advisory Board to the program made up
of six members; one appointed by the County, one by the City of Dayton,
one by the Montgomery County Mayor's and Manager's Association, one by
the Dayton area Chamber of Commerce, one by the recognized association
of refuse haulers.  While the purpose of this group is to resolve problems,
in practice there is some question as to its effectiveness.  One board
member explained that the board is not really used.

The system is presently having difficulties with environmental problems.
An attempt is being made to recycle the process water used.  However,
the pH of the water  is so low (acidic) that  it causes major corrosion
damage to pipes and stacks.  Disposal of the ash residue is also a prob-
lem.  This material  is not exempt from the County landfill  ban.  Conse-
quently,  it is piled beside the incinerator, waiting for a decision on
what to do with  it.  The major environmental problem  is the failure of
the incinerators to meet the air quality standards.  The County Air
Pollution Control Section recently obtained an order to "cease and desist"
the pollution of the air.  This problem developed as a result of changing
                               342

-------
air quality standards.  The recent adoption of stricter standards put
the Incinerator emissions above the allowable level  of participates.

The air pollution problem has directly contributed to the financial  crisis
and the rate increase to $12.50 per ton.  The anticipated modifications
will cost an estimated $4 million.  The rate increase will have an imme-
diate impact on cities (Miamisburg's costs will  increase $40,000, and many
local  officials were threatening to break their  contracts.)

Among the longer range alternatives being considered as solutions to the
environmental problems are:  (1) the development and sale of steam;  and
(2) the use of residue to fill  the open pit mines in the southeastern
part of the state.
                               343

-------
MIAMI VALLEY REGIONAL  PLANNING COMMISSION

The Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission (MVRPC) membership consists
of five counties — Clarke, Greene, Mi-ami, Montgomery, and Preble — and
31 municipalities in the Dayton metropolitan area.  These jurisdictions
represent 97 percent of the regional population.  Each county appoints
two members to the Commission and each municipality appoints one.  These
members are predominantly elected officials.

Funds to operate MVRPC come from membership assessments, local money for
special projects, and federal grants.  Membership fees are assessed at
the rate of 15 cents per capita (counties pay for unincorporated areas
only).  A few special projects for local agencies are funded separately.
The balance of the budget is derived from federal grants, primarily the
HUD "701 Program".

MVRPC concern for the quality of the environment dates back to the "State
of the Region Report"  in 1966, where the problems of air and water pollu-
tion were summarized and the future  impact projected.  The Commission's
role  in environmental management includes chiefly the following efforts:
(1) technical assistance; (2) planning assistance; (3) A-95 review; and
(k) promotion of public participation.   In general, the goal of the
Commission is to serve as a vehicle for coordinating policies and plans
throughout the regional area.

MVRPC has both an environmentalist and water management specialist on the
staff to act as technical assistance resources.  An attempt has been made
to avoid building a staff duplicating expertise  in another agency.  Con-
sequently, the Commission often relies upon existing resources, e.g., the
county air pollution staff, or local university  staff for noise expertise.
In 1967 MVRPC published a report on the "Natural Resources of the Miami
Valley Region."  The purpose of the  report was to  inventory the natural
resources of the region, analyze some of the associated problems, and make
recommendations relative to managing these resources.  Topics discussed
include:  geology and minerals, soils, water, biological resources  (e.g.,
fish, wildlife), climate and precipitation, flood plain encroachment,
water pollution, air pollution, and policy  issues and recommendations for
proper maintenance and use of resources.  This report served as the
technical base for the consideration of other environmental programs
throughout the region.

Another example of the technical assistance provided  is the "Status
Report on the Quality of the Environment" published  in  1970.  This report
attempts to critically evaluate the  broad range  of environmental problems
and programs over the  entire regional area, including air pollution,
water pollution, solid waste, unregulated development,  noise, and aesthetics.
Not only does this report evaluate current programs, but it also recommends
future action needed.  The report  requires action to be taken by no one,
except as may be persuaded by the validity of the arguments.

MVRPC staff has also provided assistance  in preparing environmental  impact
statements (e.g., Environmental Impact Statement on  Iron Horse Park, 1972).
                               344

-------
This assistance has been offered to both public agencies as well as
citizen groups.  Generally, agencies contract with MVRPC for the work
and finance the cost incurred.  Work for citizen groups has been, in
part, at partial charge.

The environmental planning efforts of MVRPC began in 1967 with the
issuance of the Open Space Plan (the plan was updated in 1972).  Other
plans include water and sewer master plans and programs for all five
counties, and the Miami Valley Regional Bikeway Plan.  These planning
efforts were made possible primarily through the availability of federal
financing.

MVRPC has been designated by the federal government as the A-95 review
agency for the region.   As such, it has the authority to review all
federally aided projects in the region to insure their consistency with
areawide planning efforts.  Recently the State of Ohio extended similar
authority to review state financed projects.  The review process pro-
vides a mechanism to relate programs in various functional areas (e.g.,
water, housing) as well as programs developed by different jurisdictions
(e.g., sewage treatment in Franklin and Miamisburg).  The review carries
with it the sanction of withdrawing approval for projects and thus the
loss of the federal or state funds.  An example in point is the case
where two small municipalities only a few miles apart each decided to
seek independently federal funds for the construction of sewage treatment
facilities.  MVRPC, supported by technical assistance from the Conservancy
District, found that two separate plants would result in unnecessary
duplication and expense.  Thus approval was withheld.  Also, MVRPC has
been quite aggressive  in the use of A-95 review procedures for implement-
ing "fair share housing" in the region.

MVRPC has been an active proponent of citizen participation in the
decision-making process in the region.   In the previously mentioned "Status
Report on the Quality of the Environment" MVRPC repeatedly criticizes
environmental agencies for their failure to involve citizens.  The key
elements of MVRPC's citizen involvement program are information and oppor-
tunity.   The extensive publications program of the Commission is aimed at
providing some of this information for citizens.  Also, the A-95 review
process includes circulating copies of plans and policies to interested
parties, including citizen groups.  And in some cases, the Commission has
gone so far as to provide the staff assistance necessary to publish news-
letters for citizen groups, e.g.,  the Stillwater River Association,  a
nonprofit environmental group "dedicated to the preservation of the
beautiful and natural Stillwater River."

As with most regional planning commissions across the nation, the future
of MVRPC is far from predetermined.  The effectiveness of the Commission
has been limited because (1) financial  constraints  tie planning efforts
to areas that are eligible for federal  funding; and (2) the absence of
authority to implement plans.

The role of the Commission over the next five years is not yet clearly
defined.  Discussions are underway in the region concerning combining

-------
 the  Commission  with  the  local  Council  of  Governments.   In addition  the
 State of  Ohio is  developing  a  system of substate  districts, with  the
 impact on MVRPC yet  to be  determined.  Finally, the  Federal Government,
 under Section 208 of the Water Pollution  Control  Act Amendments of  1972,
 seems to  be willing  to allow special  districts, such as  the Conservancy
'District, to assume  some of  the responsibility  for functional  planning.
 All  of these events  lead to  a  general  atmosphere  of  uncertainty for the
 future.
 CONCLUSION

 Several  different  types  of  regional  arrangements  for  environmental
 management  are being Used  In  the  Miami  Valley  area,  including:   conser-
 vancy district,  multi-county  health  district,  contracts  for  county-wide
 refuse disposal, joint  (federal - private  -  local)  facilities,  and
 regional  planning  commission.  The specific  examples  described  are  not
 "ideally" successful, and are constantly challenged  by new problems.
 However,  they do represent  attempts  on  the part of  several jurisdictions
 to address  environmental problems on their regional  basis.

 The regional  approach to environmental  management illustrated  In this
 report does not  include  an  example of a single al1-encompassIng regional
 environmental  agency.  Rather a unique  arrangement was devised  for  each
 problem as  it arose. This  approach  has the  advantage of increasing the
 likelihood  of political  acceptance by the  various jurisdictions and
 providing a structure responsive  to  particular problems.

 The disadvantage of using a variety  of  regional approaches is  that  there
 is a need to look  at environmental  management  In  a  comprehensive manner,
 e.g., what  is the  impact of this  method of solid  waste disposal on  air
 quality.   This perspective  does not  exist  in the  Miami Valley,  except
 through the regional planning commission.  While  the  MVRPC fulfills this
 role in part, their activities still are not inclusive of all  segments
 of the environment on a  continuing and  in-depth basis.

 It is clear from this study that  no  one regional  approach is the solution
 for all  problems in all  regions.   This  is  primarily  because  the problems
 vary from area to  area.  Second,  the size  and  scope  of a region may change
 from problem area  to problem  area.   Also,  the  institutional  framework,
 both existing and  what  is  potentially acceptable, is  different  between
 regions.   The key  to adopting a  regional approach is  not the technical
 problems but the political-administrative  problems.   Governmental juris-
 dictions are not likely  to  work for  regional programs solely for the sake
 of having regional programs.   There must be  a  perceived  benefit, such as
 lower cost, to offset  the  accompanying  liabilities,  which may include
 some loss of autonomy.   Achieving a  situation  where  each of  several juris-
 diction perceives  a "net"  benefit is not an  easy  task.

 What, then, are the factors that  have led  the  Miami  Valley into regional
 programs?  Some of the  factors are:
                                346

-------
      1.  Common Environmental Problems and Crisis.  Banding together
          to rebuild after the flood or to meet water quality standards
          is an example.

      2.  High degree of Professionalism.   ICMA survey results substan-
          tiate greater local cooperation  among counci1-manager cities.

      3.  Conscious Efforts to Cooperate.   For example,  regular meetings
          of area mayors - and managers are held to discuss current
          problems.  And, the City of Dayton has designated a staff liai-
          son with the suburban communities.

Factors such as these obviously are present in areas throughout the
nation and make regional arrangements a viable strategy  for local  govern-
ments.  Although the specific arrangements in existence  may or may not be
directly transferable to other regions, an awareness of  the alternatives
is a vital step in developing regional approaches.
                              347

-------
                             ADDENDUM  a.

REFERENCES

A.   Personal Interviews

     Dale Bertsch
     Executive Director
     Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission
     John Laney
     City Manager
     Miamisburg, Ohio
     Robert H. Mears
     Mayor
     Miamisburg, Ohio
     David Foells
     City Manager
     Oakwood, Ohio
     Ted Gabler
     City Manager
     Vandal la, Ohio
     Jerry L. Hebb
     Manager
     Personnel Safety and Environmental Control
     Monsanto Research Corporation
     Miamisburg, Ohio
     William H. Westendorf
     Environmental Control Manager
     Monsanto Research Corporation
     Miamisburg, Ohio
     L. Bennett Coy
     General Manager
     The Miami Conservancy District
     38 East Monument Avenue
     Dayton, Ohio  45^02
                                348

-------
Personal Interviews cont'd

     Timothy J.  Doyle
     Project Engineer
     Planning and Development
     The Miami Conservancy District
     38 East Monument Avenue
     Dayton, Ohio
     Robert J.  Schroer, Jr.
     Assistant  Chief Engineer
     Water Resources
     The Miami  Conservancy District
     38 East Monument Avenue
     Dayton, Ohio
     Wesley A.  Flower
     Chemical  Engineer
     The Miami  Conservancy District
     38 East Monument Avenue
     Dayton, Ohio
B.    Publications and Reports

     "Air Quality Report, Jan.-Dec.,  1970" Metropolitan Dayton
       Intrastate Air Quality Control  Region

     "Air Quality Report, Jan.-Dec.,  1971" Regional  Air Pollution
       Control  Agency

     "Air Quality Report, Jan.-Dec.,  1972" Regional  Air Pollution
       Control  Agency

     "Environmental  Monitoring  Summary,  Jan.-June,  1972"
       Mound Laboratory

     "Hydrasposa1/Fibreclaim:Solid Waste Recycling  Plant"
       Black Clawson Company

     "Iron Horse Park:Environmental  Impact Statement"
       Maimi Valley  Regional Planning  Council,  Sept., 1972

     "Managing  Water Quality...  A Job  of The Miami  Conservancy District"

     "Montgomery County Combined General Health District Air  Pollution
       Control  Regulation",  1972
                                 349

-------
Publications and Reports cont'd

     "Mound Lab and the Environment" by Monsanto

     "Mound Laboratory Environmental Control  Program,  1973"

     "Natural Resources of the Miami Valley Region," Miami Valley
       Regional Planning Council,  June, 1967

     "The Ohio Conservancy District Act Annotated",  The Ohio  Conservancy
       District Conference, W. H.  Anderson & Co.,  1970

     "Open Space in the Miami  Valley Region", Miami  Valley Regional
       Planning Council, Jan., 1972

     "Public Health NewsrAnnual Report 1971", Montgomery County
       Combined General Health District

     "Region Believes in Mutual Aid", News 1eaf
       Ohio EPA, Vol. 1, No. k, Feb., 1973

     "Regional Council, Local  Governments and Special  Districts"
       L. Bennett Coy, Paper Delivered to the Seventh  Annual
       Conference of Regional  Councils, Feb.  26, 1973

     "Regional Water Quality Management Official Plan"
       Miami Conservancy District, Apr. 5, 1968

     "Regional Water Quality Program, 1971-7V
       Miami Conservancy District, August, 1970

     "Regional Water Quality Program—Second Addition  to the  Official
       Plan", Miami Conservancy District, June, 1972

     "Regulations of the Ohio Air Pollution Control  Board"

     "Resolution Authorizing Execution of Amended Incinerator Agreement
       with the City of Miamisburg", Montgomery County, Ohio

     "Status Report:Qua 1ity of the Environment," Miami Valley Regional
       Planning Council, Feb., 1970

     "A Time For Decision", Miami  Valley Regional  Planning Commission

     "Water and Sewer Master Plan and Program", Miami  Valley  Regional
       Planning Council

     "Water Responsibi1ity:1971 Annual Report", Miami  Conservancy District

     Morgan, Arthur £., The Miami  Conservancy District (NY:McGraw-Hi 11,
       Inc.),  1951
                                350

-------
                              ADDENDUM  b.
                          ORDINANCE NO. 1835
AMENDING CHAPTER 1111 OF THE CODIFIED ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF MIAMISBURG
BY ADDING THERETO NEW SECTIONS 1111.10 AND 1111.11 AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.

WHEREAS,     it is reasonably expected that the City of Miamisburg will grow
             substantially in population over the next twenty years, and

WHEREAS,     new residents will cause a need for neighborhood park service
             proportionate to their numbers, and

WHEREAS,     the acquisition and development of park facilities to meet those
             needs should be financed by the residents of new areas directly
             benefitted thereby, and

WHEREAS,     it is the recommendation of the Miamisburg Park and Advisory
             Board that such special benefit be recognized by establishing
             a fee payable on all residential units at the time of building
             permit issuance,

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MIAMISBURG, OHIO,
TWO-THIRDS OF THE ELECTED MEMBERS THERETO CONCURRING THAT:

Section 1.
         There is hereby enacted Sections 1111.10 and 1111.11 which shall
provide as follows:

         1111.10 PARKS AND PARK SITES
         a)  There is hereby established a fee to be paid on each
             building permit issued for the construction of a
             residence structure in the City.  This fee shall be:

                          Number of Bedrooms
Fee
0-1
$A7.00
2
$63.00
3
$79.00
k
$95.00
5
$111.00
             This fee is applicable to mobile homes, and other industrially
             manufactured residential units where such units do not other-
             wise require a building permit but where it is required that
             they have a footer, foundation or other supporting slab or pad.
             And no permit shall be issued for the construction of such
             foundations, footers or pads and slabs until and at such time
             as the appropriate fee is paid.
                                  351

-------
Ord. No. 1835
         b)  All such fees shall be used for the acquisition, purchase,
             development and equipping of neighborhood parks and park
             sites in the City.

         c)  All fees collected under this section shall be placed in
             the Park Capital Fund.

         d)  No building permit for the construction of a residence
             structure in the City shall be issued unless and until
             the fee provided for in this section is paid on each such
             building permit issued.

         e)  No person, firm or corporation shall receive or be entitled
             to receive the building permit for the construction of a
             residence structure in the City unless and until the fee
             provided for in this section is paid on each such building
             permit issued.

         f)  Nothing contained in this section shall relieve or be
             interpreted as relieving any person, firm or corporation
             from complying with all other ordinances, laws, rules,
             regulations of the City or of any other governmental agency
             where they are now in force or hereafter enacted, regulating
             and governing the issuance of building permits for the
             construction of residence structures and/or commercial or
             business structures in the City.

         g)  Not withstanding provisions in this section to the contrary,
             council may, at its sole option, enter into a contract with
             any person, firm or corporation, who or which is subject to
             the payment of the fee established in subsection (a) of this
             section.  Such contract shall provide that upon the execution
             and delivery by such a person, firm or corporation of a deed
             of general warranty conveying to the City, and its successors
             and assigns, a good and marketable title to the real estate
             described in such deed, free and clear of all liens and
             encumbrances thereon, such person, firm or corporation, upon
             executing and delivering such deed, shall receive a credit
             against the fee established in subsection (a) of this section,
             which credit shall be in an amount equal to the value of such
             real estate.  The value of such real estate shall be determined
             by negotiation between the parties or agents for the parties.

         h)  Not withstanding provisions in this section to the contrary,
             council may, in the case of a Residential Planned unit
             Development, waive part or all of the fee established in sub-
             section (a) of this section.  Such waiver may be granted when,
             in the opinion of council, common areas, created and developed
             in a Residential Planned Unit Development pursuant to Ordinance
             1^82 as amended, provide recreation opportunity for the resi-
             dents of said areas sufficient to impose no measurable  increment
             in the need for neighborhood park acreage.
                                  352

-------
Ord. No. 1835
         i)  When invoking the waiver provisions contained in subsections
             (g) and (h), council shall seek the written recommendations
             of the Miamisfourg City Planning Commission and the Miamisburg
             Park and Recreation Advisory Commission in the manner provided
             by Section 4.12 of the Charter of the Municipality of Miamis-
             burg.

         j)  All persons, firms and corporations, who or which are subject
             to payment of the fee established in subsection (a) of this
             section, must pay such fee, unless and until such persons,
             firms or corporations are relieved of the payment of such fee
             by council in the manner provided for in this section.
         1111.11  OTHER OPEN SPACES
         a)  Provision of green belts or similar buffer areas may be
             required by the Council in areas where they are desirable
             to separate or protect residential subdivisions from adjacent
             commercial developments, major streets or highways, railroad
             rights-of-way, electric transmission lines, underground gas1
             transmission mains, other underground public facilities,
             public parks, major drainage channels, public parks or areas
             of special scenic or historic significance.

                  Such provision of land shall be in accordance with
             Section 1111.10 (g).


Section 2.
         This ordinance is declared to be an emergency measure necessary for
the immediate preservation of the public, peace, safety and welfare and for
the further reason that the accumulation of funds for neighborhood park
acquisition and development is required to begin at the earliest possible
date,  therefore, this measure shall take effect and be in force from and after
its passage.


Passed:  May 18, 1971                Attested:  Marcel la E. Clark	
                                                Clerk of Counci1
Approved:  Robert H. Mears, Sr.
           Mayor
                                 353

-------
                          ADDENDUM   c,

                  "1973" CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT
   BETWEEN MONTGOMERY COUNTY COMblNED GENERAL HEALTH DISTRICT
                   AND THE CITY OF MIAMISBURG
TO:        Mayor 6 Counci 1
           Miamfsburg, Ohio
ATTENTION: Mr. John Laney, Manager
"By unanimous consent of the Montgomery County Board of Health, as shown
in the minutes of thetr regular meeting conducted July 5,  1972, the
Board of Health agrees to conduct a public health program and render
public health services for the City of Mlamtsburg for one year commenc-
ing January 1, 1973, equivalent to the program carried on within the
Montgomery County General Health District.

For such services, the City of Miamisburg agrees to pay to the Montgom-
ery County Board of Health the sum of twenty-one thousand seven hundred
forty seven dollars ($21,7^*7) plus the amount of reimbursement received
from the State Treasurer and generally known as State Subsidy to local
public health.

The Montgomery County Board of Health agrees to furnish such health
services as the General Health District is receiving so far as the pres-
ent budget will permit."

                                     SIGNED:
                                     President-Montgomery Co. Bd. of Health
DATE:
                                     Health Commissioner - Montgomery Co.

The City of Miamisburg accepts the above Contractual Agreement.

                                     SIGNED:
                                     Mayor of Miamisburg City
                                     Manager of Miamisburg City

-------
                       CITY OF MIAMISBURG
                       ORDINANCE NO. 1980
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH
THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY COMBINED GENERAL HEALTH DISTRICT FOR PROVISION OF
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES DURING THE YEAR 1973 AND ESTABLISHING THE COST
THEREOF AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MIAMISBURG, STATE OF OHIO,
TWO-THIRDS OF THE ELECTED MEMBERS THERETO CONCURRING THAT:
Section 1
Section 2.
Section 3-
           The City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into a
           contract with the Montgomery County Combined General Health
           District to conduct a public health program and render
           public health services within the City of Mlamisburg during
           the year 1973.
           Cost of said contract is hereby established as $21,7^7.00
           plus the amount of reimbursement received from the State
           Treasurer as State Subsidy to local public health.
           This measure is declared to be an emergency measure necessary
           for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health
           and welfare and for the further reason that Council desires
           said contract to be in effect at the earliest date, therefore
           this measure shall take effect from and after its passage.
Passed:
Attested:
                                               Clerk of Counci1
Approved:
          Mayor
                              355

-------
                              ADDENDUM  d.
                           AMENDED AGREEMENT
         WHEREAS, the problem of the removal and disposal of garbage and
refuse has become so acute In Montgomery County, particularly within the
cities and urbanized areas, that it will, unless solved, vitally affect
the public health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants thereof, and

         WHEREAS, the officials of the various participating political
subdivisions are in accord that incineration is the most practical solution
of this problem, and

         WHEREAS, it is to the public interest that such incineration be
accomplished in the most economic manner commensurate with sound engineer-
ing practices in the construction, maintenance, and operation thereof, and

         WHEREAS, the fiscal advisors for the County in financing part of
the cost of constructing the incinerators described herein by the issuance
of revenue bonds under Section 133.06 of the Ohio Revised Code, have recom-
mended that to make such bonds marketable it will be necessary to make more
definite and certain the sufficiency of disposal or incineration charges,
and

         WHEREAS, it is necessary to amend the agreement between Montgomery
County and the City of 	, dated 	;

         NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto hereby mutually undertake promise,
and agree as follows, to wit:

                              DEFINITIONS
         As used herein, the following words and phrases shall be interpreted
to mean:

         "County" shall mean Montgomery County, Ohio

         "City" shall mean City of Miamisburg

         "Disposable waste" shall mean all garbage and combustible
          refuse, including cans, bottles, and other food con-
          tainers, provided, however, that leaves, Xmas trees, and
          other similar items may be excepted, upon recommendation
          of the Advisory Board and approved by the County.

         "Landfill waste" shall mean all other materials not designated
          as disposable wastes.
                                  356

-------
              "Licensed Haulers" shall  mean any hauler who has been
               duly licensed for the hauling of refuse or trash in
               conformity with the regulations of the Board of Health
               of Montgomery County General Health District, per
               Sanitary Regulations of the Board of Health of Mont-
               gomery County under general authorization of the Revised
               Code of the State of Ohio,  3707.01 et seq.

              "Approved Disposal Site"  shall mean any location or area
               approved by the district Board of Health for disposal
               purposes.


1.    THE COUNTY SHALL:

              (a)  Undertake the construction, maintenance, and operation of
     garbage - refuse disposal plants in accordance with the General  Plans and
     Specifications - recommended by the Joint Incinerator Study Committee,
     dated May 6,  1965;

              (b)  Employ  a consulting engineer who will be recommended by the
     Joint Incinerator Study Committee  and who shall  be responsible for the
     preparation of construction on plans  and specifications to be used in
     obtaining bids on the incinerators and their facilities; shall advise the
     County in the awarding of contracts and shall  supervise the construction
     involved in such contract;

              (c)  Issue such bonds as are  necessary to cover the entire costs
     of  the engineering and construction of the incinerators, land, and other
     facilities which bonds shall  be payable out of the revenues derived from the
     rates and charges hereinafter provided for;

              (d)  Take such action as is necessary:

                  (1)  to  require all  political  subdivisions within the county
                      either by agreement  or by regulation of the Montgomery
                      County General  Health District  to provide for the dis-
                      posal  of their disposable waste and landfill  waste by
                      the use of the official  County  disposal  plan;

                  (2)  to  have all  waste that is collected hauled to an approved
                      disposal site;

                  (3)  to  regulate and control,  in addition to the incinerators,
                      all  landfills within the County,  but outside the Municipal
                      Corporation;

                  (4)  to  prohibit  any landfill  or disposal  facilities within  the
                      County, but  outside  the Municipal  Corporation,  which is not
                      incorporated and  made a part  of the official  County Refuse
                      Disposal Plan.
                                       357

-------
              (e) To provide for an Advisory Board to be made up of six (6)
     members, one of whom shall be appointed by the County, one by the City of
     Dayton, one by the Montgomery County Mayor's and Manager's Association,
     one by the Dayton area Chamber of Commerce, representing industry, one by
     the recognized association of township trustees, and one by the recognized
     association of private refuse haulers, provided, however, that no political
     subdivision shall have more than one representative on such Board; which
     Board shall be charged with the duty of making recommendations to the County
     insofar as the number and competency of personnel, the establishment and/or
     modification of rates and charges as needed to meet the cost of management,
     maintenance and operation, and debt service charges.  Such Board to meet at
     least once quarterly and at such other times as at least three (3) members
     thereof may request with not less than four (k) members constituting a
     quorum.

              (f) To keep in operation the incinerator plants and the incinerator
     landfill facilities every day of the year, Sunday only excepted, at least
     between the hours of 7=00 a.m. and 3=30 p.m.

              (g) Shall equip each incinerator plant with an automatic weighing
     device which shall issue duplicate weighing receipts for each load, one copy
     of which shall be handed or delivered to the truckdriver at the time of
     weighing.


2.   OBLIGATIONS OF CITY:

              In consideration of the above and recognizing that the City owes a
     duty to the residents of the City to afford them every reasonable protection
     to assure their health, safety, and welfare, the City shall:

              (a) Guarantee the County, upon completion and commencement of
     operation of the  incinerators that it will deliver through its own collection
     system, and to the extent that collection is handled by licensed haulers,
     require its licensed haulers to deliver to the  incinerator plants all of its
     disposal waste.   Incinerators to be located in the vicinity of Stop Eight
     Road and Bertwynn Lane;

              (b) Pay  to the County, and/or require  its licensed haulers to pay
     under  rules and regulations established or to be established by the County
     and the General County Health District, not to exceed $3-50 per ton for such
     disposal waste in the first year of operation, said rate to apply to all
     users.  Thereafter the rate per ton shall be as established in accordance
     with procedure prescribed by  item  (B) of the "General Provisions" contained
     herein; provided, however, that such rate shall at all times be sufficient
     to pay  the expenses of operation and maintenance of the County incinerators,
     the principal and interest charges of both the  revenue and general obligation
     bonds  issued by the county, including debt service and other security  re-
     serves  prescribed for the revenue bonds and the replacement of any monies  paid
     from capitalized  reserve established in the bond and  interest redemption
                                        358

-------
account by the resolution authorizing the  issuance of said  revenue bonds.
Payment of tonnage charges shall be made within thirty  (30) days after
presentation by the County to the City or  to haulers licensed by the City,
or other users of an  itemized invoice showing the tonnage delivered, such
invoice to be submitted monthly;

         (c) To prohibit any landfill or disposal facilities within the City
which is not made a part of the official County Refuse  Disposal Plan;

         (d) To regulate and control all landfills within the City.


                          GENERAL PROVISIONS

         A.  IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED that  the annual tonnage
rate used herein is based upon the estimated weights contained  in the report
and survey on refuse disposal problems ^hich has been in the report and survey
on refuse disposal problems) which has been prepared by  the consulting engineer,
as applied to the total construction and installation costs, which also in-
cludes land acquisition, engineering and consultant fees, operating costs, all
debt service charges, and capitalized interest for the  period between the sale
of the County securities and the time that the facilities are in operation on
a revenue producing basis.

         B.  This rate  is to be reviewed annually by the Advisory Board as
provided by Item 1 (e) hereof, and such Board shall make recommendations for
adjustments depending upon the experience  and costs resulting under actual
operating conditions, it being understood, however, that any new rate or rates
so established shall be uniform as to all  political subdivisions.

         C.  Upon the faithful performance of all of the conditions and
stipulations to be performed by the parties hereto, this Agreement shall con-
tinue in full force and effect until such  time as the bonded indebtedness, in
original or refunded form, incurred by the County in the installation and
operation of the facilities included herein has been completely paid and re-
tired and may be renewed from time to time thereafter for such period or periods
of time as may be mutually agreeable by the parties hereto.

         IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED that  this Agreement shall not be binding
upon the parties hereto unless and until like agreements have been entered
into by and between the County and the cities of Dayton, Oakwood, Kettering,
West CarrolIton, Vandalia, and Moraine, and rules and regulations of the Mont-
gomery County General Health District have been established consistent with
the provisions of this Amended Agreement.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto affixed their
names and official seals this 13th day of June 1967*

 City	OF  Miamisburg      Montgomery County, Ohio

By Paul  R.  Stevich, Mayor     By 	

APPROVED AS TO FORM:          By Edward C. He Ike

  Will Jam D. Forbes	     By Robert E. Kline  	
Prosecuting AttorneyBoard of County Commissioners

                                  359

-------
                           APPENDIX 5
             PIEDMONT TRIAD REGION, NORTH CAROLINA
 Introduction

The Piedmont Triad Region is an elevgn county area in north central
North Carolina of 5^3 square miles."  This region contains 20%
of North Carolina's population.  More than 50% of the Piedmont
Triad's population is concentrated in Guilford and Forsyth counties.
Between 1970 and 2000, the population of this area is projected to
increase around kO%.   Since it was not possible to study the entire
Piedmont Triad, this field study focused on the two primarily
urban counties—Forsyth and Guilford.  Both Forsyth and Guilford
Counties have been active in developing environmental programs.
It should be pointed out that other local governments in the Piedmont
Triad have effective environmental programs and their omission should
not be taken as a reflection on their quality.
CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT

Both Forsyth and Guilford counties have active environmental groups
which have pushed for better environmental management.  In Guilford
County, citizens have exerted considerable political pressure
for environmental action.  One of the most interesting events was
the release in October 1970 of a citizen report A White Paper:
An Assay of Environmental Conditions in Guilford County with
Recommendations to Candidates for Public Office.  A group of fourteen
local scientists analyzed present environmental conditions  inc1uding
the topics of:  Population of Guilford County, Compatibility of Land
Use, The Atmosphere, Water Resources, Noise Pollution, Pollution by
Radioactivity, Thermal Pollution, Ecological and Human Values.

The primary purpose of the report was to inform the citizenry on
the environmental degradation in Guilford County and to provide
specific direction for elected government officials.  For Guilford
County, the White Paper  recommended the following:

     --Establish and recognize a nine-member citizens' board
        (an extra-governmental body, membership accepted voluntarily
        by qualified persons) to aid governmental departments
        carry out their responsibilities.
 »lt  consists of  the  following counties—Surry, Yadkin, Davie, Stokes,
  Forsyth,  Davidson,  Rockingham, Guilford, Randolph, Casewell and
  Alamanac.
                               360

-------
     — Implement the recommendations published in the reports
       entitled "Open Space" and "Open Space and Recreation
       Implementation Plan" written by the Gui1 ford County
       Planning Department including the establishment of a
       County Conservation and Recreation Board.
     --Initiate action to secure further information  (to supple-
       ment economic data) about the effects of aircraft noise
       upon human and animal  life; the limits to which aircraft
       operations may impinge upon the well-being of private
       citizens; means of providing better public mass transportation.

One year later, a supplement was added to the White Paper updating
it and reviewing their recommendations.  At that time, none of the
seven recommendations had been acted upon.   However, the supple-
ment did commend the solid waste pulverization program.

In Forsyth County, environmental groups and the local press have
been very active in stimulating environmental action.  An environmental
Coordinating Council (ECC) has been established consisting of
fifteen environmental related groups—League of Women Voters, Youth
for a Cleaner Environment, Nature Science Museum Guild, Junior
Woman's Club, Winston-Salem Jaycees, Pilot Club of Winston Salem,
Town and Country, Junior League of Winston-Salem, West End Association,
Garden Club Council, Community Environmental Action, Reynolds Planning
Council, Gordon Manor Woman's Club and American Association of
University Women.  The ECC has played an active role in conducting
research in cooperation with the county government and the City
of Winston-Salem, and in sponsoring programs in environmental education,
In addition, the Winston-Salem Journal and Twin City Sentinel have
played an active role in exposinq environmental  issues.  The high
quality of their article is reflected in the paper's winning a
Pulitzer Prize in Journalism for meritorious public service for
a series of articles on environmental problems.   One example was a
brief series of articles on a massive fish kill  in the Yadkin River
in which 35,000 fish were killed in one day.  The problem was due
to inadequate sewer system in Winston-Salem, particularly the
inability to handle the waste discharge from the Joseph Schlitz
Brewing Company.   The series  included outlining  and analyzing the
result of corrective programs taken by Winston-Salem and the Schlitz
Brewing Company.
Innovative Organizational  Arrangements

The organizational  arrangements which have evolved in the Piedmont
Region include:

     (1)  the use of citizen advisory boards, concentrating on the
         Guilford County Advisory Board for Environmental Quality
         and Regional  Piedmont Triad Committee on Environmental
         Affairs; and
                               361

-------
     (2) intergovernmental service agreements, focusing on Guijford
         County's Consolidated Water Extension Program and Solid
         Waste Pulverization-Disposal Program.

The action strategies for environmental management include:

     (1) the proposed environmental impact statement process for
         Forsyth County;
     (2) the City of Greensboro wastewater surcharge;
     (3) programs in environmental education in Forsyth County;
     CO the Piedmont Triad Council of Governments environmental
         inventory; and
     (5) the proposed soil erosion ordinance in Forsyth County.*
Citizen Advisory Board

In October, 1972, the Guilford County Board of Commissioners created
by resolution the Guilford County Advisory Board for Environmental
Quality (Environmental Board).  The Environmental Board serves in the
capacity of an extra-governmental organization of knowledgeable
citizens, and operates with the following objectives:

     --to provide technical information and supplemental advice to
       Guilford County Board
     --to aid governmental units  to maintain and/or improve
       environmental conditions
     --to assure safe, healthful, and aesthetically pleasing
       surroundings for all inhabitants, present and future.

The County officials felt that they lacked the internal expertise to
handle many environmental problems and therefore turned to the
resources and expertise  in the community.  Fortunately, within the
County are two colleges—North Carolina A £ T and the University  ,
of North Carolina, Greensboro—where some of the expertise could be
found.  In addition, the White Paper had created some strong pressure
on Guilford County to have some form of advisory body.

In selecting the Board members, the Commissioners solicited names
of potential members from environmental and civic groups as well
as industry.  A  list of 90 individuals was developed.  However, the
County Board of Commissioners could not reduce the nominees for the
Environmental Board to nine which was the number of Board members
provided for in the original resolution.  As a result,  a second
resolution was passed in December separating specialists in Water and
Air Resources.   In January, 1973, ten Environmental Board members
were appointed by the County Board of Commissioners.  The members
of the Environmental Board were appointed for initial terms of 1,
2, or 3 years, with succeeding appointments for 3 years.  The Environ-
mental Board is composed of one each of the following specialists:
*The ordinance, adopted by the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners
  (April 30, 1973), was put into effect on July 1, 1973.
                               362

-------
      —Air Resources
      --Water Resources
      --Land Resources
      --Vascular Plants
      —Societal Affairs
      --Biology
      —Aesthetic Concerns
      —Urban Technology or Public Health
      --Legal Affairs or Economics
      --Public Communications or Education

The present chairman is currently district conservationist with the U.S.
Soil Conservation Service.  Other Board members include:  two university
professors; a former teacher and present Chairman of the Environment
Projects Committee, American Association of University Women; Manager,
Pollution Control Division of an air conditioning firm; housewife active
in cultural affairs; a retired County Farm Agent; a practicing attorney
with strong environmental interests; vice president of a rendering company;
and a land developer.  In addition to the ten members, a Community
Liaison has been also appointed for a one year term by the County Commission
to act as a go-between with the Environmental Board and other community
groups, particularly ones interested in environmental affairs.  This
person is to function to disseminate information,encourage citizen groups
to recognize and use the  Environmental  Board,  and  channel  information  from
citizen groups to the Environmental Board.

This Environmental  Board does not occupy an official position with
authority to enact laws or regulations or to determine official
policies or procedures binding upon the administration of governmental
units.  However, the Environmental Board, as an integral part of its
obligations, can initiate studies and make reports of its studies and
recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners.  Within the purview
of the Environmental Board as an advisory body, the following functions
must necessarily be performed:

      — Investigate environmental conditions of Guilford County
      --periodically
      --Review regulatory procedures and methods of governmental units
      --Review appropriate records and reports of governmental units
      --Review the findings of private consultants employed by the
        County Commissioners or departments under their authority
      --Compile research data
      --Compile the results of practical tests, "pilot projects,"
        and operat ions
      —Solicit additional technical aid when required
      --Coordinate efforts and information of governmental  units other
        than those of the County government
                                363

-------
     --Encourage the establishment of formal research projects proposed
       to study environmental conditions in Guilford County
     —Cooperate with and coordinate activities of various environmental
       committees and organizations of citizens concerned with
       environmental quality
     --Cooperate with and coordinate activities of educational
       institutions, private enterprises, and private citizens
     —Solicit and review suggestions and recommendations and criticisms
       made by all individual parties and organizations
     --Explore the possibilities of acquiring public and/or private
       grants to fund special activities with objectives to improve
       the environmental quality of the County
     — Issue timely reports to the Guilford County Board of County
       Commissioners
     --Draft ordinances for enactment by the County Commissioners
     —Participate in meetings with the County Commissioners, government
       employees, and general public to explain findings, decisions,
       and recommendations as required.

To assist the Environmental Board in fulfilling these functions,
the County Planning Department has provided the Board with one staff person,

From January to March,  1973, the County government held a series
of orientation meetings for all Board members.  On March 1, 1973,
the Environmental Board held its first meeting and adopted by-laws.
As one of their first tasks, the Board decided to divide into four
subcommittees:

     --Large Scale Sites
     --Monitoring Environmental Damages
     —Energy Crisis
     --Ongoing Procedures and Operations

At the present time, the subcommittees are just getting organized.
A second task initiated by the Environmental Board was a survey of
environmental and civic groups designed to  identify areas of concern
and undesirable conditions and to solicit participation in the Board's
activities.  The responses were coming in at a very slow rate at the
time of the field study.  A third task was the adoption of a resolution
requesting that Guilford County make arrangements with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers to map all areas affected by periodic flooding  in
order that a flood plain ordinance be prepared.

 During the field studies, several operational problems were evident:

      --confusion on roles with the Board members envisioning  technical
        assistance from the staff and the staff seeking expert opinion
        from Board members
      --commitment of members to  the Environmental Board and  its goals
        as demonstrated in the lack of a quorum at several consecutive
        meetings
                                364

-------
     —§ne staff member could not provide adequate support.

An example of another type of citizen advisory board is the Regional
Piedmont Triad Committee on Environmental Affairs (Committee on
Environmental Affairs).  In 1971, forty persons were appointed to the
Committee on Environmental  Affairs to serve as a regional advisory body
on environmental and related matters.  At their first meeting, CEA
divided itself  into eight task forces:  economics, education, government,
recreation, religion, social welfare and health.  Each task force was
to analyze and  identify desirable goals and objectives in its
specified area  in relation to environmental matters.  In November 1971,
a series of workshops was held by PTCOG  in which some possible area-
wide goals on environmental issues were presented.  The task forces
went their own directions which made it nearly impossible for meaningful
integration of reports.  In addition, a gift of $6,000 from a
committee member was received, but the donor thought the funds were
never used properly.  In discussion with Roger Schecter, Regional COG
Environmental Planner, the following problems were cited:

     — individual group perspectives  and not regional or general
       environmental perspective
     --strong individual personalities dominating task force activities.

Because of its operating problems, the Committee on Environmental
Affairs has been disbanded.
 INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICE AGREEMENT
Guilford County has taken a very active role in developing intergovern-
mental service agreements with the cities of Greensboro and High Point.
Two agreements, the Consolidated Water and Sewer Extension Program and
the Solid Waste Pulverization-Disposal Program, are of  interest to
this study.

Consolidated Water Extension Program

During the early 1960's, Guilford County recognized it had the major
ingredients to attract tremendous Industrial and residential  growth;
namely, a very adequate state secondary road system, two major inter-
state highways, a regional airport, and a feeder trunk of Southern
Railroad.  In an attempt to deal  with the problem of uncontrolled
growth, In 1964 Guilford County adopted a County-wide zoning  ordinance,
established a long-range planning division as well  as provided a Building
Inspections Department (Electrical, Plumbing Mechanical  and Structural).
After establishing the regulatory and planning agencies, the  Board of
County Commissioners felt they could then supply the "missing Ingredient"
necessary for accelerated, but tightly controlled development-- public
water and sewer service.
                               365

-------
During Spring 1965, the City of Greensboro and Guilford County adopted
a resolution stating in-part, "WHEREAS, it is the intent of both
governmental units herein to provide existing water and sewer facilities
into certain areas outside...the corporate limits of the City of Greensboro
in order to adequately and efficiently provide much needed water and
sewer services...to the end that a healthy, orderly and coordinated
system of continued growth and development will be attained in a
manner most consistent with the general welfare ".

The County would finance the extensions and the City would provide the
water and treat the wastewater with existing municipal facilities.
The County, unable to utilize property tax revenue for construction
(since it could not be offered to all citizens), initially relied
heavily on  interest-free loans from industry and residential developers
to finance the first line extensions and establish the system.  The
loans were to be paid back from fees and charges paid by users of the
utilities.  Even with these meager beginnings, the program began to
snowball and within three years a system valued at $2.4 million had
been installed through these interest-free loans, non-tax revenue and
additional monies accumulated in the program's revolving account.
From 1965 through 1967, extensions were made from the Town of James-
town.  These extensions of sanitary sewer service, even though
modest in comparison to those from Greensboro, served areas extremely
important to the community.  These Jamestown extensions served
the campuses of the area's technical institute, an elementary school
and a high school; and they also served a major facility of Burlington
Industries.

In 1968, the program became a little more sophisticated with the advent
of a revised City-County Agreement.  This amended contract established
a municipal-type operation utilizing an assessment program, more
sophisticated accounting, and long-range planning.  It also contained, within
the new Agreement, the establishment of Service Perimeter Areas  in
which extensions could be made if approved by the County.  The rate
of extensions between 1968 and 1970 slowed to a certain extent with
only $1.7 million dollars worth of lines being installed.

However, 1970-71 was a landmark year for the program.  Within a period
of 12 months the County signed an extension agreement with the City
of High Point, thereby doubling the land area potentially to be served
by utilities; began confirming and collecting assessments levied on
past construction  (at least tripling the rate of revenue return from the
lines); and successfully conducted a $5 million bond referendum for
future extensions.  Owing to the use of bond funds, the funds available
in the revolving accounts, and federal and state assistance, the
program today  is extremely active.  Fiscal year 1972-73 saw approval of
line construction valued at over $2 million.  During fiscal year  1973-71*,
over $3 million worth of construction will be  initiated  (about evenly
divided between the Cities of High Point and Greensboro).
                               366

-------
The most established revolving account, with the City of Greensboro,
is presently realizing a rate of revenue return of about $200,000
annually.  These funds are, of course, added to the available bond
funds to construct additional lines.  With operation of the additional
lines approved in F.Y. 72-73 and 73-7^, the Greensboro revolving
account should eventually realize an annual revenue of over $500,000.

The program's working arrangement is outlined as follows:

     (1) On the basis of majority petition from property owners,
         public health necessity, or public developmental necessity,
         the County may approve a project.
     (2) The project's scope Is determined by the County's Division
         of Environmental Services and Division of Environmental
         Health in conjunction with the City Public Works Department,
         and is engineered to meet City construction specifications.
     (3) The County delivers the necessary funds to the City and the
         construction contract is awarded by the City.
     (4) The City's Public Works and Engineering Departments oversee
         construction.
     (5) Upon completion of construction  the probject is relinquished
         to the City.
     (6) The City's Assessment Division prepares the assessment roll
         which is delivered to the County's Division of Environmental
         Services.
     (7) The County confirms the assessments which are then administered
         by the Division of Environmental Services.
     (8) Connections to the water and/or sanitary sewer lines are
         voluntary unless ordered by the Division of Environmental
         Health.
     (9) Actual connections (meter installations, etc.) are accomplished
         by the City's Division of Water & Sewer Administration.
    (10) At time of tap-on, an acreage tap-on fee and meter fee are paid
         by the property owner.
    (11) The City's Division of Water & Sewer Administration submits
         quarterly users statements to the County customers.
    (12) Every quarter, 25% of the water and sewer rates collected
         in the County is placed in the City-County Revolving Account.
    (13) Future construction is financed from this revolving account.

Identical,  but separate, accounts and procedures are used for all three
municipalit ies.

The program is now in its seventh year.  Guilford County has utilized
it as a major asset for attracting industry and residential  developers
who desired to locate in the unincorporated areas to escape municipal
taxes;  or who desired proximity to the interstates, rail  service or
airport; or who desired a more "rural" setting; or a combination of
these reasons.
                               367

-------
The County has been very selective regarding the type of industry
desired.  There is only one large, "wet" type industry there, and
probably no others will be allowed on the system.  The great majority
of industrial and commercial customers have been located along the
interstates and within industrial parks (such as corporate headquarters,
light machine fabricators, research divisions, warehouse terminals,
motor inns).  Residential developments have been of the higher-density,
single-family and multi-family variety.  The extension program has
contributed greatly to the influx of quality development over the past
seven years.  As an example, property values in the airport area (which
has received the bulk of extensions) were $67,500,000 in 196**; today they
are $170,000,000.

Through this program, all governments are benefiting both directly
and indirectly.  The great majority of the County has been and will
be untouched by these extensions.  These areas will remain in a totally
rural state.  County government and the governments of the cities within
its boundaries will continue to offer their citizens, corporate and
private, a choice of three environs in which to live and work: totally-
urban high-density within the corporate limits; lower-density "rural"
with several municipal-type amenities   or a totally rural, low-density
setting.  Guilford County has no intention  to transform all of its
560 square miles into a sprawling mass of industrial parks, apartment
complexes and high-density subdivisions; but the County does feel
selected areas can support such development if adequate services and
controls are provided.
Solid Waste Pulverization-Disposal Program

On February 9, 1972, the governments of Guilford County, the City of
Greensboro and the City of High Point signed an agreement for a joint,
cooperative solid waste processing and disposal program.  This
authorization formally culminated a sixteen-month effort, including the
passage of a $1.2 million bond referendum, to establish a mutually-
beneficial program which would attack the solid waste problems of the
three governments while, at the same time, utilize disposal methods
more aesthetically and environmentally acceptable to the local populace.

Until 1970, existing policies and procedures were inadequate to meet
"rural" citizen demands and to effectively handle the increasing rate of
generation of industrial and commercial waste  in the unincorporated areas.
Because of an existing cooperative program of extending municipal
water and sanitary sewer lines into the unincorporated areas of the
County, many outlying residential areas had reached urban densities.
There also were substantial satellite commercial and  industrial
developments.  At that time, Guilford County's sanitation program relied
heavily on private enterprize to provide collection and disposal in
these "rural" areas.  Five private collection  firms operated in
unincorporated areas with common collection rates being established
by the County Commissioners.  However, most of these firms chose
                               368

-------
the highest-density residential areas in which to operate.  In addition,
private collectors were left to their own initiative to establish
and operate their own landfills.  In terms of disposal operations,
Guilford County did subsidize one private collector's landfill operation.
As a result of this subsidy, any citizen of Guilford County may deliver
and deposit his own individual refuse at the operation.  This reliance
on private enterprize was relatively convenient for county government,
but the system was not meeting developmental demands, not providing
maximum environmental protection as required by the public and by state
and federal regulations, and not providing a program offering the
convenience desired by rural citizens.

In November of 1970, the Board of County Commissioners requested the
County Manager's staff to better define the local problems and
make a brief survey of disposal techniques applicable to the local
situation.  The following rural problems were cited:

     (1) Private collection firms, allowed to operate anywhere within
         the unincorporated areas, concentrated their services on high-
         density residential areas.  Subsequently, residents in lower-
         density areas do not have collection available; consequently
     (2) Most private collection firms have to operate their own
         individual landfills.
         a) In many cases their haul-times and -distances to their
            private operations are enormous (one firm had a 3-hour
            round trip to his fill).
         b) Having individual fills for each collection firm is
            grossly inefficient in terms of a total County system.
         c) Many individual fills are substandard in operational
            practices.
         d) The fills (except the one subsidized operation) are not
            available to the public.
     (3) The single County subsidized fill serves a 560 square mile
         area making the rural citizen's individual efforts to deliver
         his own refuse most inconvenient.

During the course of the investigation, it was discovered that the
two major municipalities within Guilford were also experiencing problems with
their own sanitation programs.  Greensboro had adequate landfill
area, but a vigorous annexation program had caused severe problems in
dead-head hauls cross-town to their landfill.   On the other hand,
High Point had no problems in transport, but had a critical problem
regarding remaining useful landfill area left.

Realizing that perhaps a common solution could be found to solve the
distinctly separate problems experienced by all three governments, the
Vice-Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners proposed a Tri-
Governmental Solid Waste Committee (Solid Waste Committee) to be formed
to attack the problems.   In December, 1970, the Solid Waste Committee
was created and held its first meeting to organize and to define goals.
                               369

-------
The Solid Waste Committee consisted of the following individuals:

     Elected Section
           Vice-Chairman, Board of County Commissioners, Guilford
              County-Committee
           Chairman
           Mayor Pro-Tern (now Mayor Elect)-City of Greensboro
           Councilman (now Mayor Elect)-City of High Point

     Staff Section
           Director of Environmental Services-Gui1 ford County-
              Cpmmittee Coordinator
           Director of Environmental Health-GuiIford County
           Director of Public Works-Greensboro
           Director of Public Works-High Point
           Superintendent of Sanitation-Greensboro
           Superintendent of Sanitation-High Point

The Staff Section immediately began to more thoroughly investigate the
relationship of the individual problem areas.  Sample weights of loaded
municipal vehicles were taken, estimated volume capacities and weight
calculations were made on private collection vehicles, local areas of
private service were better defined, differences in the two municipal
policies and procedures were clarified, time and distance studies  were
made on all collection vehicles and the characteristics of local solid
wastes were determined.  Therefore, for the first time, a clear picture
of the total, County-wide solid waste generation,  collection and
disposal situation became available.

Several methods of solid waste disposal were also seriously investigated
in light of the additional local information gained.  Most standard
methods were quickly eliminated owing to poor operational cost-effective-
ness comparisons and/or the potential needs for very substantial capital
outlays.  Although local government experience with solid waste shredding
or puliverization in the U.S. was minimal, enough data was available
to determine that this type of operation deserved more scrutiny.  By
January 1971, a substantial amount of data on pulverization was acquired
through shredder manufacturers and from the few local governments
using  the system.  The Staff Section then presented their findings to
the Elected Section at a full Committee meeting.  The Solid Waste
Committee decided at that time that pulverization of solid waste
deserved very serious consideration.  On-site tours of pulverizer
operations were suggested and subsequently approved by the three governing
bodies.

In February, the Committee members, plus two additional County Commissioners,
travelled to Mobile, Alabama and Albuquerque, New Mexico.  The City of
Mobile was operating a very elaborate composting operation and  in
Albuquerque the Committee saw a pulverization demonstration on the
premises of a shredder manufacturer.  After returning from New Mexico,
the Solid Waste Disposal Committee was convinced that the best tri-
                               370

-------
governmental program should be based around several  pulverization
installations.

On February 2k,  1971, the Elected Section of the Committee held a
news conference  and released the following statement.

     Guilford County, Greensboro and High Point governments
     are combining efforts to collectively solve the area's
     solid waste problems.  The proposals to be made by
     this joint-committee to the three governing bodies are:
     That the County assume total responsibility for all  solid
     waste disposal; that the solid waste be pulverized prior
     to disposal; and that several  transfer-pulverizing
     stations and at least one additional landfill  be implemented
     for purposes of efficiency and convenience to municipal
     collection  vehicles, rural private collectors and rural  citizens
     without collection services.

     These recommendations are to be made to the two city
     councils and the Board of Commissioners by this Solid Waste
     Disposal Committee which is composed of elected representa-
     tives and  staff members from the three governments.

     This committee has been investigating new solid waste
     disposal practices and equipment since late last year.  The
     committee's aim was to design  a total system which would
     (1) be able to effectively and efficiently handle today's
     solid waste volume requirements as well as the needs for
     tomorrow (2) provide ultimate  disposal  without polluting
     the air, land, or water (3) rid landfills of the nuisances
     that are usually associated with such operations such as
     odor, rodents, insects, smoke, blown paper, dust, mud and
     unsightly excavation (*0 be compatible with all existing
     collection  and disposal equipment (5) prolong the life of
     each disposal site so that the additional land acquisitions
     will be infrequent (6)  increase the economy of public and
     private collection practices by decreasing the haul-distances
     of collection vehicles  (7) make individual delivery of
     solid waste by rural  citizens  more convenient (8) and
     reduce the  time needed  before  a completed landfill  site
     can be reclaimed for public or private use.

     It is felt  by this Committee that all of the goals will
     be met through the implementation of the three major
     recommendat ions.

     The County  will also make immediate application to the
     federal government for  financial assistance under a grant
     program offered by the  Department of Health, Education,  and
     Welfare.  If the application is approved, the grant could
     cover up to 75% of the expected one million dollar plus
     price tag for the total system.
                              371

-------
The Solid Waste Committee had determined at that time that County
government was to assume responsibility for the disposal of municipal
waste as well as that collected in the unincorporated areas.  Because
three separate pulverization stations and landfills would comprise
the system,  it was evident that maximum coordination as well as close
fiscal control would be necessary.  It had also been decided that,
once pulverized, the waste should then be deposited in either
established, conventional fill areas and/or in new fill locations.  The
Resource Recovery Act of 1970 had been made public law in October and
from the grant requirement outline it seemed as though an attempt
should be made for federal assistance.

In March, 1971i the Committee Chairman as well as representatives from
the Staff Section visited the Madison, Wisconsin pulverizer station
and then continued to Edmonton, Alberta, Canada to see their site.
This trip was much more technically-oriented with discussions with local
officials and operators directed at operational details, maintenance,
reliability and financing.

The next two months were spent in pulverization research and logistic
details.  A consultant from North Carolina State University was retained
to prepare a computer transhipment model to reroute collection vehicles
in conjunction with combinations of alternate pulverization station
sites, possible transfer station sites and possible landfill sites
(new and existing).  During this time a preproposal application for the
new federal program was being drafted by the County.  As a backup
measure, the solid waste pulverization program cost was also added
to five other issues on an upcoming County bond referendum in June.
The research done by the Staff Section had concluded that the program
would cost about $1.2 million dollars.

To finance the pulverization program, $1.2 million was provided
in a $30 million bond package which was presented to the voters.
With the support of garden clubs and environmental organizations, the
pulverization bonds passed by k to 1 majority.  The capital financing
plan was to ask the citizens of the County for the total amount needed
for the program.  Then, if federal funding was offered, only a portion of
the bonds would be sold to provide local matching funds.  However,
word came from the EPA regional office that the Act's funding had been
reduced and that, administratively, they were not prepared to proceed
with Implementation of the new program.  Immediately after the bond
referendum, the Staff Section began holding committee sessions at least
once a week.  At several meetings, manufacturer's representatives attended
and made presentations concerning their equipment and services.

During the-frequent meetings  in July, August and September, staff
was formulating a detailed policy and procedures Manual which included
the role and responsibility of each individual of each government.
The Manual included the estimated capital outlay per installation,
estimated cost of operation, and proposed amortization schedule for
each piece of equipment and structural component.  Methods of disposal
of special wastes not suitable for pulverization were  investigated
                               372

-------
and included as addendums to the Manual.  A limited amount of resource
recovery is also discussed in an addendum.

The Manual's rough draft was submitted to the Elected Section in
November of 1971-  It became evident that a serious disagreement existed
between the County and one of the municipalities as to the source of
operating revenue.  The municipality proposed the operating expenses
of all three stations be funded through County tax revenue.  To facili-
tate this estimated annual need of $250,000, a County-wide tax
increase would be necessary.   The County was unwilling to authorize
this increase for several reasons including the disproportionate
ratio between industrial generation of solid waste versus  its real
property value and the fact that many rural citizens were without
collection service and therefore would be paying for a disposal operation
whether they could utilize it or not.  The problem was finally resolved
in December of 1971 by deciding to weigh each collection vehicle as it
delivered waste and bill its owner (be it public or private) at the
end of the month on the basis of actual cost per disposed ton times
the actual  tonnage delivered.  A nominal fee will also be charged
to each private auto delivering domestic solid waste.  Debt service
on the bonds will be met by the County from revenue derived from a local
County sales tax.  The Manual draft was tentatively approved by the three
governing bodies and a brief, formal  agreement was drafted.  The formal
agreement refers  to the Manual as an outline of officially adopted
policies and procedures.

Along with the Manual's preparation during December and January equipment
specifications were also being drafted in anticipation of formal
agreement approval.  About three weeks after formal agreement adoption,
on February 29, 1972, specifications were submitted to six bidders.
Bids were opened on April 21, with the award of contract by County
Commissioners coming no later than May 15-  The specifications called for
the shredder, material handling equipment and the engineering services
of the shredder manufacturer.

Once the initial contract was awarded, Staff Section worked with the
manufacturer's engineering department to design and compose
specifications for the total  installation, including foundations,
structures, roads, scale stateion, rolling stock, etc., for a second
round of bidding with general contractors.  The specifications were
drafted so that design and construction of the three installations would
be phased.   As one station becomes tested and operational, any obvious
design improvements made evident by that station will be incorporated
in plans for the subsequent installation.  In October, 1972, the
groundbreaking was held for the High Point-Gui1 ford County Solid
Waste Disposal Facility with actual  operations beginning in Spring of
1973.

The Solid Waste Committee envisions a future consolidation of all
installations under one agency (as originally proposed) as soon as
                             373

-------
County-wide collection Is available.  Such a collection program is
presently in the formulative stages (probably a rural  container
system).  When this single agency (probably the County) assumes
responsibility for the operation of all three installations, an annual
disposal surcharge or fee will probably be levied to each home, business
and industry (based on actual annual tonnage generated), in lieu of
the monthly billing, to fund the year-to-year operations.  The
vehicles will then be weighed only for record-keeping purposes.

The Committee has illustrated that three associated, yet distinctly
individual governments can rely on the talents, authority and resources
of each other to formulate and implement constructive programs to deal
with major area-wide problems.  The success of this committee has
spurred much interest in forming other, similar committees to confront
other, shared problems in Guilford County.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

In North Carolina, the state government adopted the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act of 1971.  Within this act there is a provision
for environmental impact statements (EIS),requiring state agencies to
prepare impact statements for legislative and other actions Involving
public expenditures which significantly affect the state's environment.
These impact statements detail the following points:

     —environmental impact of the proposed action
     —any significant adverse environmental effects which cannot
       be avoided should the proposal  be implemented
     —mitigation measures proposed to minimize the impact
     —alternatives to the proposed action
     —the relationship between the short-term uses of the environment
       involved  in the proposed action and the maintenance and
       enhancement of long-term productivity; and
     —any irreversible and irretrievable environmental changes
       which would be involved in the proposed action should it
       be implemented.

Review and advisory procedures are required to assure that the EIS is
as accurate as possible and that all interested agencies and units of
government have  an opportunity for review or examination.  When a
state agency finds that a major adverse change in the environment will
occur as a result of the proposal, it is directed to submit the pro-
posal and statement to the Governor for special revjew and final
decision by him  or by his designated agency.  In an amendment proposed
for the 1973 legislature the required EIS must be attached to the
"earliest identifiable plan, report, or other documentation of a
project."  A project  is further defined as that which  involves
"construction, building, modification of a landscape, or site,
or any similar action involving major changes in the environment"
(Senate Bill 126).  The amendment provides also that comments shall
                              374

-------
be sought from "citizens,  individuals, or representatives of organized
groups with professed interests related to the environmental impact
involved."  The responsibility of the state agencies is further
defined:  "State programs  involving regulation or control through
permits or licenses or standards for State, local, or private projects
which,  in the aggregate, have a significant environmental impact,
shall present in their annual work program a program plan which delineates
the rules and regulations of the program and a detailed guideline on
how these rules and regulations shall be administered, including
how officials shall make decisions under the program-which take
into consideration the environmental impact of those decisions,
including (the content of required EIS statements).  Such plans...
should be reviewed and updated annually."

It is not known to what extent state agencies have established rules
of procedure for the actions required under the Act of 1971.  Illustrative,
perhaps, is the promulgation of an order for public hearing on April 1,
1973 by the Utilities Commission of its proposed requirements of an
EIS and other data in the siting of electric generating facilities.
For local government, the Act authorizes, but does not require, these
governments to require any special district, public authority, or
private developer to submit an impact statement on major development
project.  So far, only one small beach community has adopted an
environmental impact assessment process.

However, Forsyth County had just completed in March, 1973, a
comprehensive study for local environmental impact statements entitled
The Feasibility of an Ordinance Requiring Environmental Impact State-
ments.  The report was prepared by the manager's administrative staff
with the assistance of the County Planning Department, Environmental
Planning Staff.   In responding to the Board of Commissioners request,
the report focused on the following questions:

     —Have EIS requirements elsewhere been effective?
     --What have been the major accomplishments and problems of
       EIS requirements?
     --Is an EIS needed in addition to current or proposed environ-
       mental programs?
     — If warranted, who and what should be subject to it and how
       can it be enforced?

The report analyzes experiences with EIS in California, particularly
San Diego County, Vermont, and Florida.   For those case studies, the
Report presents pros and cons of local  EIS (see Addendum a).

In speculating about the adoption of a local EIS ordinance,  the Report
pointed out that all public and private projects (exceeding  two
acres) would be reviewed by local  government as to the total effect
on the environment.  This would include those elements of the environment
                             375

-------
not now covered by local laws or ordinances such as noise, social  aspects,
of historical or archaeological significance, as well  as other standards
listed above.  It was felt that the recommended ordinance would provide
Forsyth County with the opportunity of adopting requirements stricter
than the prevailing state or national standards.  The  statement would be an
umbrella document listing all permits, requirements, and approvals needed
for a project.  This assumes that the Act of 1971 provides sufficient
authority for Forsyth County to make issuance of a building permit or
other entitlement contingent upon a satisfactory environmental impact
statement.  Otherwise, the entire process would be an  academic exercise,
because there would be no authority to require changes in a project
should the E1S review show detrimental effects on the  environment.

In conclusion, the Report stated that most arguments against the EIS
can be nullified if the governing board will direct its staff to provide
an EIS procedure which:

       (1) Is simple enough for any developer to complete with minimal
           engineering help, yet comprehensive enough  to be effective.
       (2) Is easily evaluated by present staff in a short length of time
           so as not to unreasonably delay proper development.
       (3) Is based on  legal standards which will hold up readily  in
           a court of law.
       (l») Will apply to all projects, both public and private.
       (5) Provides insurance against abuse.
       (6) Provides for on-site monitoring by environmental agency which
           acts as reviewing agency for projects during actual construction.

If environmental protection measures used are not effective, enforcement
procedures should be available  to stop progress on  the project until  it
can be shown to meet acceptable, clearly defined standards.  The  report
warned, however, that no matter how perfect  the procedure, the governing
board must realize that  it and  they will face stiff opposition from  some
quarters.  Everywhere EIS procedures have been enforced,  the governing
board has come under fire at one time or another from developers  and  in-
terested  citizens.  Ecologists  will accuse  the board of "selling  out"  if
the regulations are too  lax  (in their estimation), and developers  will
protest against what they will  consider unreasonable hardships.

The Report recommended  that the Board of Commissioners recognize  its
responsibilities to conserve and protect natural resources; to maintain
a human environment which will  be safe, healthful, productive, and
aesthetically  pleasing;  to provide the widest range of beneficial  uses
of the environment without degradation or risk to health and safety;
and to preserve and protect  important historical, archaeological,  and
cultural  elements of our common  inheritance.  To carry out this responsi-
bility the report proposed an ordinance creating an EIS process.
The proposed ordinance  requires that prior  to the  issuance of a building
or zoning permit for a  project  that significantly affects  the quality
of the environment, an  Environmental  Impact  Statement shall be filed
                                376

-------
with the approprfate agency or County government (see Addendum b).
This impact statement is to include the following:

       a)  The environmental impact of the proposed action;
       b)  Any significant adverse environmental effects which cannot
           be avoided should the proposal be implemented;
       c)  Mitigation measures proposed to minimize the  impact;
       d)  Alternatives to the proposed action;
       e)  The relationship between the short-term uses of the
           environment involved in the proposed action and the
           maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity;
       f)  Any irreversible and irretrievable environmental changes
           which would be involved in the proposed action should it be
           implemented.

The EIS report is to include consideration of the following variables:

       (1) Air Q_uality
       (2) Noise
       (3) Solid Waste Disposal
       (4) Toxic Substances
       (5) Water Supply
       (6) Wastewater Disposal
       (7) Energy Use
       (8) Health
       (9) Public Safety
      (10) Erosion, Sedimentation
      (11) Historic Building or Area, Archaeological Site Destruction
      (12) Aesthetic Considerations
      (13) Wildlife Habitation
      (1*0 Recreation and Open Space
      (15) Land Use Change
      (16) Population Density
      (17) Transportation, Streets, and Highways
      (18) Education
      (19) Economic Development
      (20) Employment
      (21) Housing

The suggested process for implementing local EIS procedures can be found
in Table 1.

The proposed ordinance further declares to be a policy of the Board of
Commissioners that there will  be established a section of County govern-
ment to be called the Environmental Clearinghouse.   The Environmental
Clearinghouse will have the responsibility for determining whether a
project significantly affects the quality of the human environment,
and reviewing all environmental impact statements submitted.  The
Clearinghouse will be located within the proposed Environmental Affairs
Department which would develop and enforce the EIS procedure.  The depart-
ment would be built around the already proven core of personnel in the
County Air Quality Control Department, with additional personnel drawn
from Planning, Health, and Inspections.
                                377

-------
     Table 1.   PROCESSING TABLE FOR FORSYTH COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL  STATEMENTS
Public Projects
                                           Private Projects
                                           1
1.   The "responsible" official  of
    the initiating agency consults
    informally with Clearinghouse
    officials.

2.   If "significant effect" is  de-
    termined, EIS is prepared by the
    initiating agency and transmit-
    ted to the County Clearinghouse
    agency.*  (If not of significant
    effect, a Negative Declaration
    is issued, public notice given,
    and opportunity to challenge if
    afforded the public.  If chal-
    lenge is successful an EIS  must
    be prepared).

3.   Clearinghouse disseminates  EIS to:
    A. Agencies with jurisdiction or
       expertise, as: Air Quality
       Control, County/State Conser-
       vation Service, CCPB staff,
       County Engineering Adminis-
       trator, N.C. Office of Water
       and Air Resources, Dept. of
       Archives and History; others

    B. Public through news media and
       file copy for examination.

A.   Clearinghouse receives comments

5.   Clearinghouse summarizes comments
    and returns one copy with recom-
    mendation to the initiating agency;
    retains file copy for public.

6.   Responsible official makes deter-      t
    mination to:
    A. Approve project.

    B. Revise plan and submit revised
       EIS to be processed through
       steps 3,^,5,6.
                                   I
    C. Withdraw project.

*To be designated by Board of Commissioners
Developer consults informally
with County Clearinghouse;
receives guidelines, necessary
forms.

Developer submits required data
to Clearinghouse.  If "signifi-
cant effect" is determined,
developer submits EIS to same.
(If not of significant effect,
a Negative Declaration is
issued, public notice given,
and opportunity to challenge
is afforded the public.  If
challenge is successful, an EIS
must be prepared).
                                           3.   Same as for public projects.
                                           k.

                                           5.
Same as for public projects.

Clearinghouse summarizes comments
and returns one copy with recom-
mendation to developer; retains
file copy for public.

Developer may:
A.  If recommendation is denied,
   modify plan and submit new
   EIS to be processed through
   steps 3,^,5.

B. Request public hearing on
   original plan.
                                    378

-------
Table 1.  continued.
Public Projects

7.  Board of County Commissioners
    takes required official action
    if project is forwarded.
Private Projects

7.  Reviewing body  advertises and
    holds public hearing on the
    original or new ElS.

8.  Reviewing body finds that require-
    ments of law have been met; or
    may refer project back for further
    revision. (Legality of latter
    step to be determined).

9.  Necessary permits and issued on
    finding that requirements of law
    have been met.  (if developer
    seeks permit in absence of finding
    and is denied, he can seek writ
    of mandamus).
                                    379

-------
WASTEWATER SURCHARGE

Within the Greensboro boundaries are a number of major industries—textile,
cigarette, meat packing, dairy, food processing, chemical,  and metalplating.
The wastewater discharge, particularly from textile plants, is extremely high.
The City operates two wastewater plants under the Water and Sewer  Department.
During 1970, the City surveyed over one hundred industries  on  such Items as
water consumption, number of work days, number of employees, type  of Industry,
nature of product produced, and the nature of wastewater discharge.  From
this survey, it was determined that a number of industries  had no  more than
weak domestic wastewater.  However, the discharge of a few  industries  was
very expensive to treat,which cost the city additional funds.   As  a  result,
the City initiated a wastewater surcharge program based on  the following
rationale:

   —due to the vast number of rivers and streams surrounding  Greensboro, it
     is imperative for the City's waste to be treated to a  very high degree—
     35% to 33% efficiency.
   —the cost of wastewater treatment of polluting substances  should be
     distributed to those discharging industries
   --the City must have full cooperation of industry with respect  to discharged
     materials.

In January 19&1, the City adopted an ordinance that established limitations  on
waste which they would accept, including:

   —storm water and drainage
   --any liquid or vapor having a temperature of 150°F
   --any solids such as ashes, sand, mud, etc.
   --any gasoline, flammable or explosive liquids
   --any improperly shredded garbage
   --any waste having a stabilized ph of less than 5-5 or more than  10.0
   —any cyanides
   --any noxious or malodorous gases
   --more than 1 mg/1 of copper, zinc or chromium
   —more than 100 mg/1 of fat, oil or grease exclusive of  soap.

Although the ordinance did not place restrictions or limitations on  the quality
of BOD or suspended solids nor establish a surcharge, it did provide for
property access and for monitoring devices to be installed  at  the  industries'
expense.  In an amendment passed in October 1961, a surcharge  was  established
on those industries and commercial establishments which contribute excess BOD
and suspended solids in their wastewater discharge.  No maximum limit  on
concentration was set forth.  However, at the request of the industries, the
effective date of the surcharge was six months later in order  to give  industry
an opportunity to clean up their discharge.  The surcharge  rate was
established at $22/1,000 lb. of BOD and $24/1,000 lb. suspended solids.
In discussing the method of establishing the surcharge, Ray Shaw stated that:
                                   380

-------
      The rate of surcharge was established by utilizing the
      1961 budget for treatment plant operational costs Including
      an amortiziation figure of 3-5 percent for a life of 25 years.
      This amounts to slightly over six percent per year.  The
      1961 plant loading data were used to calculate the unit cost.
      It was assumed that a typical domestic waste would have a
      BOD and suspended solids concentration of 200mg/l and that
      if a waste exceeded this strength by 50 percent, then it
      was indeed a strong waste.   It was further assumed that
      the sewer volume charge which at that time was 65 percent
      of the water bill, paid for the treatment of the waste up
      to the 300 mg/1 limit which was established.*

Since 1961, the surcharge rate has been raised to $23 per 1,000 Ibs.
of BOD and $30 per 1,000 Ibs. of suspended solids.

Immediately after the amendment's passage, the city sent out a letter
to all potentially affected  industries volunteering city personnel  labora-
tories free of charge to aid industry in problems of in-plant control.
Three responses occurred:

      --clean up and install necessary equipment
      --partial clean up by eliminating most costly pollution
      --no action.

As a good example of the second alternative, a slaughter house installed
two new mechanisms—a blood collection tank and a mesh vibrator screen
for solid separation.  The blood was pumped to a rendering plant for use
as a raw material while the solid material was hauled away in a dumpster.
These waste control mechanisms reduced the BOD level from 1575 mg/1
to 500 mg/1 and suspended solids from 550 mg/1 to 225 mg/1.  However, the
third alternative most often occurred since it was cheaper to pay the
city.

A sampling schedule was set up based on monthly rate:

      --less than $100 of surcharge, twice a year
      --$100 to $500, four times a year
      —over $500, six times a year.

Any industry may request a second sampling if  it  feels  that - the  first
sample did not represent its  average discharge  to  cover  city
expenses, the City charges $50 per day.   To sample on a 2^-hour basis,
the City purchased sampling mechanisms and a trailer for ready move-
ment.  One sampler proved to be inadequate so the City constructed
*Shaw, Ray E., Jr."Experience with Waste Ordinance and Surcharge at
 Greensboro, N.C.," Journal Water Pollution Control Federation (January
 1970), pp. l»5.
                              381

-------
a second in order that two industries could be sampled simultaneously.
However, the City found that the sampling processes were hampered by:

      --no power available at location
      — inaccessible location of weir box
      — isolation of trailer from plant personnel
      —better sample collection methods.

A minimum of three days is devoted to sampling each plant with an
authentic average used to determine rate.  Due to sampling problems
with restaurants and laundromats, a special fixed  unit charge is
made.  To determine that charge, an average discharge was made on three
laundries with the standard set at 525 mg/1 for BOD and 250 mg/1 for
suspended solids.  For restaurants, a sample of five were chosen, but
lacked any consistency.  As a result, restaurants'charge is $.03^5/unit.

The costs of operating the program amounted to $18,067 in fiscal 1969,
which was primarily spent on the industrial waste supervisor's salary
and a laborer assistant.  However, 25% is spent on plant operational
duties.  During the first years $618,000 was collected, which represents
32% of the operational costs excluding amortization of equipment.

The advantages to this program of wastewater surcharges appear to be:

      --the program is self-sustaining financially
      --industry is kept aware of the problem of wastewater treatment
      —current information can be distributed.
ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

In April 1973. the Environmental Coordinating Council of Forsyth County
and Reynolds House sponsored a two evening seminar entitled:  Ecology
Seminar on Environmental Awareness.  An Ecology Seminar Committee, under
the chairmanship of Peter Weigl, Assistant Professor of Biology at Wake
Forest University, identified the following objectives in designing the
seminar:

      — identification and open discussion of local environmental problems
      — recognition of accomplishments by various segments of the
        commun i ty
      —presentation of different approaches which may lead to solutions
        to some of the local environmental problems.

The first evening focused on Problems of Land Use,  including discussion
of topics such as Coexistence with Nature, Grading and Flood Plain
Problems, and Urbanization and Transport.  The second evening dealt with
Approaches to Environment,  including presentations on Law, Business,
Development and Industry Parks, and Citizen Participation.  Participants
in the seminar were experts from the community.
                              382

-------
Another educational activity in Forsyth County is the acquisition of J/2
hour of Sunday prime time television on the local NBC affiliate.  Since
September 1972, Forsyth County Government had produced a series of
programs designed to educate the public about county government and its
activities.  During the field study visit, the county was in final
preparation of the following Sunday's show which focused on the soil
erosion problem in Forsyth County and a proposed ordinance for remedying
the situation.  This particular show had been developed by an interested
citizen in cooperation with the County manager's office.  The citizen
had taken a series of slides demonstrating the destruction of a reservior
due to soil erosion from construction sites.  The slides were coupled
with an informative dialogue about soil erosion.
ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY

The Piedmont Triad COG, in cooperation with the Army Corps of Engineers,
is in the process of developing an Environmental Reconnaissance Inventory
for the Triad region.  The objectives of the inventory are:

      —to identify and locate environmentally sensitive areas
      --to identify possible actions which could restore or enhance
        environmental quality
      --to provide information to the public and governmental units.

The inventory includes such items as:

      —places of historic interest
      — free flowing white water areas
      --wildlife habitats
      — locations for unique species of plant and wildlife
      --caves
      --areas of critical  environmental concern (e.g., swamps, polluted
        rivers, etc.)

At the time of the field study, a preliminary draft was open for public
review and the addition of useful information was solicited.
SOIL EROSION CONTROL

Within Forsyth County, soil erosion from new construction sites during
heavy rain common in the southeastern part of the United States has been
a very critical environmental problem.  During the last two years, many
streams and creeks have been eliminated as the result of silt.  The
rationale behind the recently passed ordinance is to stop soil erosion by
controlling the quality of new developments.  The technology is simple;
and the county only needs to get the developers to act by educating
them on how to construct drainage processes.  The enacted ordinance
was written by the Homeowners Association, in cooperation with Forsyth
County officials, over a two year period.  The ordinance's purposes are
to prevent:
                              383

-------
      —any harmful increase of the rate sand, silt or other suspended
        solids are carried off property by drainage water flow
      —any change In the flow rate which will cause increased flooding
        or erosion
      —any hazards to the public health
      --continued erosion of soil unprotected.

Under this ordinance, the County requires development permits before
grading and that the permit be properly displayed on the property.
If no permit is obtained,or the permit is invalid, the developer is
subject to a $50 per day misdemeanor.  One criticism of the proposed
ordinance is that enforcement is tied too closely to building permits and,
as a result, development of land could occur before selling.
SUMMARY

In this field study, an attempt has been made to highlight some
environmental management programs from the Piedmont Triad Region of
North Carolina.  These programs are critical since the region is in the
process of large scale growth and development. However,  the environmental
problems are not as critical as in the highly industrialized areas of
the United States.  In terms of the organizational  approaches,
emphasis has been placed on regional approaches and regional cooperation
as demonstrated by the pulverization and water erosion programs.
Because of the abundance of water resources, one of the  first environ-
mental actions was the establishment of a wastewater surcharge.  At
the present time, many additional environmental actions  are under
consideration,including the environmental impact statement process
and reorganization of environmental functions and services.

-------
                        ADDENDUM  a.
 EXCERPTS  FROM  FORSYTH  COUNTY  (N.C.)  STUDY  OF  "THE  FEASIBILITY
 OF  AN  ORDINANCE  REQUIRING  ENVIRONMENTAL  IMPACT  STATEMENTS"


CONTROLLED DEVELOPMENT:

For
      (1)  The existing framework of laws and regulations dealing
          with development are too fragmented to deal effectively with
          total environmental  considerations.   A unified Environmental
          Impact Statement procedure  would provide a "one stop" method
          of communicating government requirements to developers.
      (2)  The adoption of an Environmental  Impact Statement procedure
          would forestall impulsive requests for rezoning, variances,
          and special use permits.
      (3)  The EIS would help prevent over-development which would
          exceed the local government's service capacity, being a
          part of the community's environmental  resources.

Against
      (1)  EIS is another governmental intrusion into the private sector.
      (2)  Zero growth enthusiasts may use the Environmental  Impact
          Statement to oppose all development.
      (3)  EIS could lead to a moritorium on growth similar to actions
          taken in several Western and Northeastern communities.
          This could ruin economic development for the entire region.
      (!»)  The public will not benefit from the curtailment of development
          and alienation of industry by EIS requirements.
COST, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE

For   (1) Land is a resource which, if made unfit for human habitation,
          cannot be replaced at any cost.
      (2) Inexpensive but destructive development will eventually cost
          more in the long run than careful (EIS approved), thoroughly
          planned development using the most ecologically sound methods.
          A California builder was recently quoted as saying," Some of
          the things we are fighting now are caused by developers who took
          advantage of poor regulations for a quick turn of the dollar.
          This has left a mar on the land, and people don't want to see
          it happen again."
      (3) Often the income from an increased tax base derived through
          unbridled residential, commercial, and industrial development
          will be completely negated by the increased demand for costly
          public service in poorly planned areas.
                            385

-------
      (4) Cost for preparation of EIS amount to less than 1% of
          building cost.  (A small price to pay for the protection
          afforded).
      (5) The costs of EIS generally range with the size and cost
          of the total project so that small builders are not dis-
          criminated against.

Against
      (1) Developers will protest costly construction delays while
          decisions are pending on the Environmental Impact State-
          ments.
      (2) More rigid criteria and the cost of EIS preparation will
          increase engineering, consultant, and materials costs which
          will increase the cost to the consumer.
      (3) Administrative costs in government will increase due to
          the need for an EIS evaluation and possibly on EIS preparation
          staff.  The developers' costs will be passed to the consumer
          through tax increases.
      (**) Only attorneys will profit in the long run from the long
          and tedious court battles which will ensue from the enforce-
          ment of the EIS ordinance and procedures.
      (5) It will be necessary to either increase the review and
          hearing workload of the commissioners, planning board, or
          create a new board or commission to handle EIS.
      (6) Political costs paid by the commissioners enacting such
          a policy may be significant in terms of developer, industrial
          and commercial support.
      (7) The complexity of EIS attacks one of the mainstays of the
          building industry, the small local builder/entrepreneur,
          in a discriminatory fashion.
EFFECTIVENESS  IN MEETING ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS

For
      (1) The  requirement will give the Commissioners the
          opportunity to establish a policy of protecting the natural
          and  human environment and to move toward achieving this
          objective by legislation and the establishment of administra-
          tive procedures.
      (2) It provides the means for local government to examine the
          full effect of urban development on the total environment
          and  coordinate the growth of the community.
      (3) If offers the opportunity to codify and upgrade standards
          in areas of environmental effect, both those now controlled
          and  those uncontrolled at present.

Against
      0) Local  legislation will discriminate against large developers
          with fairly good plans and allow developers of two or less
          acres  to go without control no matter how poor their plan.
                            386

-------
      (2) Even an acceptable EIS is no assurance that there  is no
          harm to the environment in actual practice.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION

For
      (l) It offers a way to provide local citizens with the oppor-
          tunity to review and comment on proposed development.

Aga inst
      (I) There will be an increase in the public hearing load for
          the Commissioners or other existing appointed board.
      (2) Litigation against the county can result.
                          387

-------
                       ADDENDUM b.


     ORDINANCE REQUIRING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
WHEREAS, the North Carolina General Assembly has authorized the govern-
ing bodies of all cities, counties, and towns, acting individually
or collectively, to require any special-purpose unit of government
or private developer of a major development project to submit detailed
statements reflecting the environmental impact of such projects:

NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Commissioners of Forsyth County hereby
ordains pursuant to G.S. 113 A.8 that any special-purpose unit of
government or private developer of any major development project,
where such project significantly affects the quality of the environ-
ment, submit at the earliest identifiable stage of the project a
detailed statement setting forth:

      (a) The environmental impact of the proposed action;
      (b) Any significant adverse environmental effects which
          cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented;
      (c) Mitigation measures proposed to minimize the impact;
      (d) Alternatives to the proposed action known to the person
          submitting the statement, including:
          (1) Alternative uses of the land in question, and
          (2) Alternative ways to achieve the purposes of the
              proposed project:
      (e) The relationship between the short-term uses of the
          environment involved in the proposed action, and the
          maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity;
          and
      (f) Any irreversible and irretrievable environmental
          changes which would be involved in the proposed action,
          should it be  implemented.

AND WHEREAS, at  least ten  (10) copies of the environmental impact
statement shall be filed with  (the County Clearinghouse Agency) for
review by said agency and transmittal to local, state, and federal
agencies having jurisdiction or expertise.  One  (l) copy shall be
placed  in a file at the office of  (the Clearinghouse Agency) and
shall be made available for inspection by the public.

AND WHEREAS, guidelines relating to the preparation of environmental
impact statements under this ordinance shall be prepared and made
available by the (Clearinghouse Agency) in accordance with the  intent
and purpose of this ordinance and  shall apply  in the preparation of
environmental  impact statements required by this ordinance.
                            388

-------
Specifically, and without limitation of other existing'or future guide-
lines, the guidelines set forth in Schedule A of this ordinance shall
apply to environmental impact statements required by this ordinance.
(The material set forth in Schedule A is included for the convenience
and information of persons submitting environmental  impact statements).
DEFINITIONS

The term "major development project1' includes, but is not limited to,
shopping centers, subdivisions and other housing developments, industrial
and commercial projects, projects involving dredging or filling,  and
any project which involves removal of any ground cover, natural  or
man-made, of any buildings or other structures, or any water course
or body of water, either natural or man-made, provided that this  definition
shall  not include any projects of less than two contiguous acres  in
extent.

A "project significantly affecting the quality of the environment" is
a major development project that may have a detrimental impact on air
or water quality or on ambient noise levels for adjoining areas;  that
involves large scale alteration of existing environmental components,
including possible contamination of a public or domestic water supply
system or source, effects on ground water, flood hazards, erosion or
sedimentation potential; that will affect historic or archaeological
sites; that will significantly increase traffic hazards and congestion;
or will affect the healthful and convenient distribution of the population
and its housing and the wise and efficient expenditure of public  funds
in the adequate provision of public utilities and other public require-
ments.
ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT

Within sixty (60) days subsequent to the filing of the environmental
impact statement and after review and comment by the designated
Clearinghouse Agency, the Board of County Commissioners shall  hold a
public hearing on the proposed project.   Notice of the hearing shall
be published in a newspaper of general  circulation wfthin the  area no
less than two weeks prior to the date of the hearing.   The Superintendent
of Inspections shall not issue any building permit or certificates of
occupancy or compliance for any structure within a major development
project except upon finding that the requirements of this ordinance
have been met.  Nor shall any approval,  permit, license, certificate
or filing provided for by any zoning ordinance, subdivision control ordinance,
or other land use control ordinance be granted or allowed for  projects
subject to the control of this ordinance by the Board of Commissioners,
the Superintendent of Inspections or any other county official or body
except upon a finding that the requirements of this ordinance  have been
met.
                               389

-------
EFFECTIVE DATE

This ordinance shall be in full  force and effect from and after the
date of its adoption by the Board of Commissioners of Forsyth County,
North Carolina, etc.
                                390

-------
SELECTED WATER
RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM	
4.  Title

Environmental  Management and Local Government

7,  Author(s)
Steve Carter,  Murray Frost, Claire Rubin, Lyle Sumek
9.  Orga.aiza.tion              :
International  City Management Association
1140 Connecticut Avenue
Washington, D.  C.  20036
                                         in.  Project No
                                         11.  Contract/Grant No.
                                              801374
15. Supplementary Notes
Environmental Protection Agency  report
number EPA-600/5-73-016, February 1974.
16, Abstract
This report presents  the results of a study of environmental management  and
local government.   The  study has two main components: (1) a survey of  chief executives
in cities over  10,000 population & counties over 50,000; and,  (2) a series  of field
studies of local environmental management in Dallas, Texas; Inglewood, California;
Miamlsburg, Ohio;  & the Piedmont Triad Region (Forsyth and Guilford Counties),  North
Carolina.
The major topics covered in the study include: perception of the definition of  environ-
ment, priority  of  environment   as,a local policy issue, and types of  environmental
problems facing each  local government; adoption of local policy statement on the en-
vironment; existence  of citizen environmental boards, environmental agencies, environ-
mental sections in master plans, land use controls, other environmental  controls, mor-
atoria, environmental quality standards, environmental impact  assessment procedures,
environmental law  suits, tax incentives and penalty charges; factors contributing to
and factors creating  obstacles to development of environmental programs; and, relations
with state and  federal  agencies.
17a. Descriptors

survey, case study,  environmental management



T7b. Identifiers
lie. CO.WRR Field & Group

18. Availability
Abstractor Steve Carter
                                                    Send To :
                                                    WATER RESOURCES SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER
                                                    US DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                                    WASHINGTON. O C  2O24O
               institution International City Management Association
OUS. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1974 546-317/3Z7 1-3

-------
-------








OC
1-

^:










LU
O

>- o£
1— LU
Z 3
3 LU
O CO
CJ
>_
CO

a
O)
c in
— T3
o to
4J -a
— c
C ID
O 4-*
z: co
-
— <0
a c
O  O OO CM vO LA -J" O -a~ CT\ P-.cT»
< o — en o oo — oo en — o i-v
a* *~ "~ "~ "~ "~ "~


• LA cr\ CM en — OO CM VO en •* —
OLA _ _ _ „ ___ -a- —
z

—» LA •— fNooro r--.LAr~.vo — -a~
< LA ____ . 	 „ -a- —
*~*


•
o


-~ VO r-. LA CM — CM O VO LA OvO
^ oo o r-x en r^» oo oo oo crt CT^ r*^.
d£ "~

•
O *^ U^ ^^ "fl" U^ O^ vO CT\ O^ r**« vO
ZVO ^CMr- ^- ^ ^- ^Ti—


^ cr\ -3-CMvO— — O CM O CNJ.—
<£ r^ ^.^fsjcsi ^CsJCMCM LT\CM
••"••'

•
o
z

o o o
o o o
.— .— .—


— CM CM



•— CM CM
— CO —







OO LAOO
oo oo oo



-a- -a- LA
— cry —


vo o r>«
. 	 4- —










CO
-a-
LU
_J
03
rf
1-






















_
Z
O
z:

_]
a:
—1 LU
3 CO
CD —
LU O
CC. Z

CO
^
LU
a£

Z
LU
^"
Z
O
_
>
z
LU 02
^







en
c in
— -a

O  TO
a c
O Q
•0 4J
<: to
en
c in

L. i_
o re
•— c
Q n>
£S
in
cms
c u
.- rq
a c
O (D
-a 4->
< CO

— . O OfAOO OOLALA -a~O OOO
< LA LACALAO OCMI^ -a~O LALA
--^ ^— V— *—
*e

•
O LA CM — — — O — — tr\ -5-— • 	 TO


— . o -a-rocM— — •— -a- -a- a^— CMOOO
^ •—
***


•
Q


-x VO OO — — O CT> t — 3- LAO O OO VO
< O OO — — OOOO O— — OOO

d*~~ — — — — „__ _ _ _

•
o r^ r-.ooo LACMvo-a- \o— — o vp
ZLA — — CM — — — CM -a-— — -a-

"••* ^f r*^ o oo en LA ^~ LA ro -a* o o r^ P--
 LA O LA
O O CM —
O.


C
o

en
0)
oc

o
•~
_c
Q.
(0
U
cn
8
o





^_
ID
l_
4-1
4-> C
in <0
(0 O

E
c
i_

o
CJ

M-
o

E
!_
O
L.
l_
0
4-1
(0
L.
4-1
in

c

'i
T3
<

4J
3
O
JZ

5

i_
o
4J
ID
L.
4J
in
•^
c
•—
E
-o
<

_c
4J
Is















C
_^C
c
=>

138