►
From YouTube: Bellevue City Council Special Meeting - Nov. 14, 2019
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
With
us
tonight
is
councilmember
Stokes
deputy
mayor
Robinson,
councilmember
Lee
council
members
on
councilmember
new
in
house
and
councilmember
Robertson
has
recused
herself
from
this
particular
proceeding
and
made
that
statement
of
a
few
weeks
ago.
This
is
a
process,
one
quasi-judicial
proceeding
which
the
council
members
are
acting
as
judges.
A
It
is
a
bit
different
than
the
way
that
you
see
us,
so
we
are
scheduled
to
continue
consideration
of
the
appeals
of
the
hearing,
examiner's
decision
to
approve
with
conditions
Puget
Sound
Energy's
application
for
conditional
use
permit
for
the
South
bellevue
segment
of
the
energized
Eastside
project.
We
expect
to
adopt
a
motion
tonight
giving
direction
to
the
City
Attorney's
Office
to
draft
an
ordinance
to
be
brought
back
on
the
December,
2nd
City
Council,
regular
session
agenda
that
incorporates
the
direction
of
the
council
on
the
appeal
and
on
the
project.
B
Therefore,
this
proceeding
falls
under
the
provisions
of
the
state's
appearance
of
Fairness
Act
and
under
that
act,
council
members
must
place
on
the
record
the
substance
of
all
ex
parte
communications
with
opponents
or
proponents
with
respect
to
the
conditional
use
permit.
That
is
before
the
application.
That's
before
the
council
tonight,
ex
parte
communications
may
be
in
the
form
of
verbal
conversations,
emails
or
other
writings
and
an
announcement
of
the
content
of
those
communications
and
of
the
parties
right
to
rebut.
B
The
substance
of
the
communications
must
be
made
at
each
hearing
where
action
is
taken
or
considered
on
the
CEP
application.
At
the
council's
October
16
2019
appeal
hearing
I
identified
18
emails
as
potential
ex
parte
communications
received
by
council
members
between
April
8
2019,
when
the
hearing
examiner's
hearing
closed
and
October
16
the
date
of
the
appeal
hearing
in
general,
those
emails
addressed
the
topics
of
energy
demands
and
options
on
the
east
side
of
King
County.
In
addition,
there
were
several
emails
regarding
requests
to
meet
with
council
members
about
these
issues.
B
Council
members
on
also
stated
that
she
participated
in
an
editorial
board
with
the
Seattle
Times
on
June
13,
where
a
question
was
raised
about
the
energized
Eastside
project,
but
that
she
informed
the
group
that
she
could
not
discuss
the
matter.
The
parties
were
then
provided
an
opportunity
to
rebut
the
substance
of
any
ex
parte
communication
during
the
October
16
appeal
hearing
and
no
party
provided
any
rebuttal.
B
Since
that
time,
staff
have
again
searched
all
emails
received
at
the
council's
email
address
and
at
individual
council
members,
email,
City,
email
addresses
and
no
potential
ex
parte
communications
were
found
during
those
searches.
So
tonight
I
will
ask
each
council
member
individually
if
they
have
any
additional
ex
parte
communications
to
disclose.
You
only
need
to
disclose
any
additional
ex
parte
communications
that
have
occurred
other
through
them
through
those
City
email
accounts
and
that
have
occurred
since
October
16
2019.
B
The
disclosures
will
be
preserved
again
for
purposes
of
maintaining
a
record
of
these
communications.
Should
there
be
a
need
for
them
in
any
subsequent
legal
proceedings,
but
their
substance
will
not
be
considered
by
the
council
in
making
its
decision
after
the
council
members
go
through
your
individual
additional
ex
parte
disclosures
I
will
again
ask
the
parties
if
any
of
them
wish
to
rebut
or
speak
in
opposition
to
the
substance
of
any
of
the
potential
ex
parte
communications
that
have
been
disclosed
so
starting
with
councilmember
Stokes,
and
it's
going
down
the
line.
Councilmember
Stokes.
B
A
D
B
A
Much
proceeding
from
here
I'm
going
to
provide
some
opening
remarks
and
also
provide
a
little
bit
of
context
again
for
what
the
rules
are.
Regarding
proceedings
like
this,
then
I'm
going
to
launch
into
what
I
see
is
the
outcome
of
having
reviewed
the
record,
the
testimony
and
the
the
Hearing
Examiner.
Mr.
Lee
has
specifically
asked
to
also
make
a
comment,
so
when
I
am
done,
he
will
make
a
comment
and
then
that
will
be
afforded
the
opportunity
to
other
council
members
for
whatever
they
wish
to
make.
A
So
the
first
thing
I
do
want
to
do
is
I
want
to
thank
the
parties
for
the
work
that
you
have
done
on
this.
Your
work
has
been
very,
very
helpful
to
us
in
the
way
you
organized
it
I
know,
I
can
speak
for
the
entire
council
to
say
that
we're
very
impressed
with
the
work
of
legal
counsel,
the
evidence
that
you
presented
and
need
the
advocacy
that
you've
made
on
behalf
of
your
clients.
It
was
excellent.
It
was
very
well
done.
A
In
addition,
I
hope
you'll
also
in
your
office's,
extend
our
thanks
from
the
City
Council
to
all
of
those
in
your
office's
who
have
worked
on
this
case.
This
amount
of
information
cannot
be
compiled
without
the
assistance
of
many
people
and
truly,
we
would
like
you
to
pass
along
our
thanks
to
those
people
on
behalf
of
the
council.
A
I
also
want
to
thank
our
staff,
I
think
do
a
couple
of
weeks
ago,
but
the
work
that
was
done
by
the
city
staff
to
compile
all
of
this
documentation
put
it
in
a
place
that
council
members
could
read
it
and
to
be
able
to
make
sense
of
15,000
pages
of
information
was
made
much
easier
by
their
work.
I
also
want
to
thank
the
especially
the
three
pro
se
appellant
in
this
case-
miss
Lopez
mr.
Halverson
and
mr.
Hanson.
A
Reading
the
file
in
this
case
reminded
me
of
how
much
work
they
have
done
on
behalf
of
the
City
of
Bellevue,
to
increase
the
electrical
reliability
of
this
city.
It
goes
back
a
number
of
years,
actually,
probably
over
a
decade
and
I
know.
The
council
is
very
appreciative
of
all
of
that
work
and
they
have
led
to
I
think
it
is
led
to
having
a
city
or
a
like.
There
is
a
better
electrical
reliability
and
I
just
think
they
they
are
do
a
major
thanks.
A
A
We
are
not
here
to
make
a
decision
in
the
first
instance
of
this
case
about
whether
the
Cu
P
should
be
issued,
but
instead
we're
here
to
determine
whether
the
hearing
examiner's
decision
is
supported
by
the
material
and
substantial
evidence
that
is
in
the
record.
Evidence
is
material
if
there
is
a
reasonable
probability
that
the
presence
or
absence
of
the
evidence
would
alter.
The
decision
by
the
fact-finder.
A
Substantial
evidence
is
a
sufficient
quantity
of
evidence
in
the
record
to
persuade
a
fair-minded
and
rational
person
of
the
truth
or
correctness
of
a
finding
the
appellant
bared.
The
burden
of
proof
in
these
appeals
and
counsel
may
only
grant
an
appeal
if
the
appellant
have
carried
their
burden
of
proof
and
the
council
finds
that
the
decision
is
not
supported
by
material
and
substantial
evidence.
In
making
this
decision,
the
council
is
required
to
give
substantial
weight
to
the
hearing.
A
Examiner's
decision
I
read
the
hearing
examiner's
decision,
including
the
findings,
in
fact,
and
conclusions
of
law
reviewed
the
evidence.
That's
in
the
record,
as
well
as
the
briefs
that
were
given
by
the
parties.
We
all
have
done
that
the
hearing
examiner's
cited
to
evidence
in
the
record
that
supported
his
findings
and
conclusions
and
I
understand
that
there
was
opposing
evidence
on
some
issues
which
the
Hearing
Examiner
weighed
in
terms
of
credibility
of
witnesses
and
the
persuasiveness
of
the
of
the
evidence.
A
A
Examiner's
decision
that
all
of
the
criteria
in
the
city's
land-use
code
necessary
to
issue
a
Cu
P
for
an
electric
utility
facility
has
been
met,
giving
substantial
weight
again
to
the
hearing
examiner's
decision
we've
had
the
record
before
us
and
have
had
the
opportunity
to
review
it
and
talk
to
the
city
attorney
about
it.
We
have
met
as
group
to
discuss
what
is
in
the
record
and
based
on
that
and
based
on
the
positions
of
based
on
my
position
as
the
mayor
I'm,
going
to
take
several
minutes
now.
A
To
summarize
what
I
believe
is
stated
by
the
record
and
provide
you
with
my
conclusions,
based
on
the
record
the
expert
testimony,
the
decision
of
the
Hearing
Examiner
and
the
criteria
established
I
believe
there
is
material
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
supporting
the
hearing
examiner's
decision
that
all
of
the
necessary
criteria
have
been
met
while
the
appellant
in
their
in
their
notices
of
Appeal,
challenged
a
number
of
the
findings
and
conclusions
of
the
Hearing
Examiner.
The
parties
did
not
provide
briefing
on
arguments
to
the
council
on
many
of
the
issues.
A
The
party's
briefs
and
oral
argument
focused
primarily
on
the
issues
of
need
and
reliability,
visual
impacts
and,
in
part,
some
of
the
testimony
on
the
pipeline.
So
I
am
going
to
focus
my
comments
this
evening
on
those
issues,
although
again
I
believe
there's
material
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
to
support
the
hearing,
examiner's
findings
and
conclusions
that
all
of
the
necessary
criteria
have
been
met
to
issue
the
Cu
P
on
need
and
reliability.
A
The
relevant
decision
criteria
are
that
the
applicant,
which
is
here
PSE,
demonstrated
that
an
operational
need
exists
that
requires
the
location
of
or
expansion
of
the
proposed
site
and
that
the
proposed
electrical
utility
improves
reliability
to
customers,
served
and
reliability
of
the
system
as
a
whole
or
as
certified
by
the
app
by
the
applicants
licensed
engineer
and
that's
found
at
our
land
use
code.
Twenty
twenty
to
fifty
five
III
and
II
for
call
your
attention
to
the
record.
A
At
eighty
four
C
and
eighty
four
D
in
the
decision
by
the
Hearing
Examiner
concluded
that
the
two
criteria
were
met.
The
Hearing
Examiner
cited
to
a
number
of
places
in
the
record
where
there
is
evidence
supporting
these
criteria.
I
would
like
to
point
out.
In
particular,
there
were
a
number
of
studies
done
following
2009
at
finding
17
the
examiner
notes,
three
studies
by
PSC
or
the
City
of
Bellevue,
including
the
electrical
reliability
report
in
2012
quanta
needs
assessment
in
2013
and
quanta
supplemental
assessment
in
2015,
referring
to
the
cuantas
studies.
A
The
examiner
notes
and
I
quote
here,
confirmed
that
if
growth
in
demand
continued
as
projected
the
East
Side's
existing
grid
would
not
meet
federal
reliability
requirements
by
the
winter
of
2017
18
and
the
summer
of
2018,
without
addition
of
230
kv
to
115
kV
transformer
capacity
at
finding
19.
The
examiner
refers
to
the
city
of
Bellevue's
independent
study
of
PSC's
report.
The
examiner
writes
more
significantly
and
enhancing
the
credibility
of
the
reports
submitted
by
the
applicant.
A
The
City
of
Bellevue
commissioned
a
separate
study
to
evaluate
PSC
system,
which
also
confirmed
the
need
for
the
energized
Eastside
project
is
speaking
here
in
terms
of
the
u.s.
East
D
at
finding
20.
The
examiner
notes,
PSC
informed
the
city
that
peak
demand
had
been
exceeded
in
the
summer
of
2017
and
was
warned
that
caps,
that
is
corrective
action
plans,
would
be
in
place
for
2018
the
examiner
notes,
PSC's
witnesses
appeared
credible
and
forthright
during
their
testimony.
In
a
letter
to
the
city
manager,
mr.
A
miacca
dated
June
8
2018
coke
PSC's,
director
of
electrical
operations,
writes
our
forecasts
have
long
indicated
that
peak
customer
demand
could
exceed
capacity
as
early
as
the
winner
of
2017
or
the
summer
of
2018.
Hence
the
energized
Eastside
project.
In
fact,
our
peak
demand
increased
faster
than
modeled
and
our
actual
2017
summer
peak
demand
exceeded
our
load
forecast
for
the
summer
of
2018
one
year
earlier
than
expected.
This
letter
is
found
in
the
DST
staff
report
at
page
4224
of
the
record
appellant
Sarg
you,
the
data
from
the
studies
are
too
old.
A
Hearing
Examiner
at
finding
29
concluded
mr.
Ned
rude
credibly
testified
that
PSC
has
gone
back
to
review.
Weather
deficiencies
exist
using
more
current
data.
He
confirmed
that
PSC
analyzed
data
again
in
December
of
2016,
2017
and
2018,
and
that
the
updated
data
from
each
time
period
showed
peak
demand
exceeding
system
capacity.
A
The
corrective
action
plan
is
currently
for
load
shedding
or
rolling
blackouts,
including
in
residential
neighborhoods
that
are
located
along
the
route
of
the
south
segment
and
therefore
there
is
a
need
for
the
project
to
prevent
these
problems
in
the
residential
areas
located
along
the
route.
One
of
the
comments
raised
by
the
public
during
the
review
of
the
project
by
DSD
and
at
the
hearing
before
the
Hearing
Examiner
was,
if
average
uses
of
electricity
is
flat
or
declining.
How
can
there
be
a
need
for
this?
A
Project
conservation
has
improved
the
average
use
of
electricity
in
our
growing
communities,
but
it
is
when
the
weather
turns
biting
cold
or
very
hot.
That
peak
demand
takes
over
the
USC
report
independently
commissioned
by
the
city,
was
very
instructive
on
the
issue,
as
it
related
to
the
Newark
codes
aimed
at
stopping
escalating
blackouts.
Based
on
all
of
this
and
other
significant
evidence
in
the
record,
I
believe
there
is
material
and
substantial
evidence
to
support
the
hearing.
A
Examiner's
decision
that
PSC
demonstrated
an
operational
need
exists
and
that
the
proposed
facility
improves
reliability
on
how
spend
a
few
minutes
on
a
couple
of
other
issues
and
then
some
technical
issues
on
visual
impact,
looking
at
the
impacts
of
properties
in
the
vicinity
of
a
project,
is
important.
That's
why
well,
prior
to
this
project
even
coming
forward,
the
council
incorporated
consideration
of
impacts
on
those
properties
in
the
vicinity
of
these
types
of
projects
in
our
city
code.
A
Key
to
the
impacts
is
how
can
the
effect
of
a
project
be
minimized
at
finding
35,
the
Hearing
Examiner
found
PSC's
decision
to
use
the
existing
corridor
minimized
tree
removal
compared
to
establishing
a
new
corridor.
The
examiner
states,
as
properties
adjacent
to
the
transmission
line
corridor,
currently
have
utility
facilities,
in
their
view,
shade,
viewsheds
and
neighborhoods.
The
willow
one
root
has
lower
impacts
compared
to
established
to
establishing
a
new
corridor.
A
Significant
care
was
taken
to
minimize
the
impacts,
particularly
in
the
Somerset
neighborhood
in
the
south
segment
at
pages
32
and
33,
which
our
findings
of
fact
83
be.
The
examiner
further
talks
at
length
about
how
the
design
is
compatible
with
and
responds
to
the
existing
or
intended
character,
appearance,
quality
of
development
and
physical
characteristics
of
the
subject,
property
and
notes.
The
project
will
not
introduce
a
change
in
land
use
and
that
the
number
of
site-specific
changes
have
been
made
in
the
design
to
address
neighborhood
concerns,
including
considering
trees
and
pole
Heights.
A
There
was
public
testimony
and
information
in
the
record
regarding
the
impact
of
the
project
such
as
this
on
property
values.
However,
the
city
staff
reported
report
noted
the
EIS
did
not
find
studies
that
indicated
a
negative
effect
on
property
values
due
to
the
replacement
of
lower
voltage
with
higher
voltage
transmission
lines
in
an
existing
utility
corridor.
A
In
any
event,
the
studies
that
that
were
looked
at
indicated
that
the
effect
of
a
transmission
line
on
sales
price
of
properties
diminished
over
time
and
would
be
short-term
effects
of
transmission
lines
on
sales
prices
of
property,
diminish
over
time
and
all
but
disappear
in
five
years,
was
the
quote
from
the
study.
So
I
do
believe.
In
this
case,
there
is
material
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
to
support
the
hearing.
A
Examiner's
decision
on
these
briefly
on
the
pipeline
safety,
Hearing
Examiner,
discussed
pipeline
safety
at
length
from
finding
of
fact
62
through
74,
including
noting
that
there
are
a
significant
number
of
pipeline
safety,
related
conditions
of
approval.
Hearing
Examiner
relied
on
the
expert
testimony
of
Wolfgang
Filch
and
the
Final
EIS
and
concluded
at
finding
of
fact
74
that
the
conditions
of
approval
quote
should
serve
to
enhance
and
hopefully
improve,
Public
Safety
by
reducing
current
risks
again,
I
believe,
there's
material
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
to
support
the
hearing
examiner's
decision.
A
There
are
a
few
other
issues
that
I'm
going
to
cover.
First
is
segmentation:
to
the
extent
the
appellant
argues
that
PSC
was
required
to
submit
one
Cu
P
application
for
both
the
North
and
South
segments.
The
land
use
code
does
not
require
that
and,
as
the
Hearing
Examiner
noted
at
finding
a
fact,
nine
in
his
decision
he
does
have
jurisdiction.
He
does
have
jurisdiction.
He
does
not
have
jurisdiction
to
require
that
in
the
notice
of
appeal,
since
alleges,
violation
of
BCC
20,
2255
d4,
that's
notice
of
appeal,
paragraph
2.7,
it's
not
clear.
A
This
issue
was
raised
before
the
Hearing
Examiner,
even
if
it
was
the
Code
section
only
requires
the
applicant
to
provide
a
description
of
all
methods
of
community
outreach
or
involvement
conducted
by
the
applicant
prior
to
selecting
a
preferred
site
for
the
proposed
electrical
utility
facility.
It
does
not
mandate
PSC
apply
for
both
the
north
and
south
segments.
A
In
one
application
there
has
been
the
hearing,
examiner's
alleged
approval
of
the
north
segment,
the
appellant
Sarg
you
that
the
Hearing
Examiner
somehow
approved
more
than
the
south
segment,
the
South
Bellevue
segment
of
the
transmission
line,
and
that
is
simply
not
the
case.
The
only
CU
p
application
before
the
Hearing
Examiner
was
for
the
South
bellevue
segment,
and
his
decision
makes
clear
that
he
is
only
approving
the
South
Bellevue
segment
subject
to
specific
conditions
of
approval,
as
stated
in
section
7
on
page
37
of
his
decision.
A
There
are
also
several
issues
raised
by
the
appellant
that
the
council
does
not
have
jurisdiction
to
decide.
Those
are
first,
the
constitutional
due
process
claims
second,
claims
of
bias
by
the
Hearing
Examiner
third
challenges
to
the
adequacy
of
the
CEPA
environmental
impact
statement.
A
significant
number
of
conditions
have
been
applied
to
this
project,
both
by
development
services
department
and
the
Hearing
Examiner,
and
they
are
contained
in
the
DST
staff
report,
as
well
as
the
hearing.
A
D
You
mr.
mayor
I
took
this
very
seriously.
I
made
my
decision
independently
by
pouring
over
the
hearing,
examiner's
decision
and
thousands
of
pages
in
20-plus
volumes
of
testimonies
I
came
to
the
conclusion
that
there's
material
and
substantial
evidence
to
support
the
hearing
examines
decision
that
the
proposed
project
complies
with
the
electrical
utility
decision
criteria
in
cities,
land
use
code,
twenty
twenty
to
fifty
II
and
complies
with
conditional
use
decision
criteria
of
twenty
thirty
be
one.
D
Forty
city
staff
listed
in
her
report
concluded
that
the
proposal
is
consistent
with
city's
comprehensive
plan
and
utility
policies
that
he
meets
local
demand
growth
and
protect
reliability
in
the
east
side
of
King
County.
The
utility
policies
focus
on
ensuring
reliable,
sustainable
and
high
quality
service
for
the
whole
community.
D
Moreover,
Miss
dad
also
recognized
there
is
tension
between
the
utilities
obligation
to
meet
in
growing
demand
and
providing
reliability
and
the
comprehensive
plan
policies
to
ensure
new
and
expanding
utility
facilities
and
sensitive
to
neighborhood
character.
The
proposal
as
conditioned
balances,
the
policies
around
neighborhood
caret,
including
policies,
are
on
trees
and
hide
limits
with
utility
policies
related
to
reliability
and
sustainability.
D
Viewing
Park
is
discussed
and
mitigated
efforts
made
to
minimize
the
impact,
although
not
eliminated,
property
value
is
examined
and
found
that
negative
impacts
are
short-term,
unbalanced.
The
need
of
reliable
energy
for
the
whole
community
always
impact
to
some
neighborhoods.
The
proposal
may
not
satisfy
everybody,
but
that
is
not
what
we
are
asked
to
do.
We
are
asked
to
decide
if
the
hearing
is
eminent
decision
should
be
upheld,
based
on
evidence
on
record
I,
find
that
there's
material
and
substantial
evidence
to
support
the
hearing.
D
A
C
F
After
spending
a
significant
amount
of
time
on
the
very
large
record,
as
well
as
the
testimony
before
the
Hearing
Examiner
I,
concur
with
me,
arch,
ummannaq
and
council
member
lee
that
there
is
material
and
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
to
support
the
hearing.
Examiner's
decision
and
therefore
I,
agree
that
the
appeal
should
be
denied.
Mr.
E
Midas
one
again
thank
all
the
parties
for
their
hard
work
and
on
the
mayor,
touched
on
that
already,
but
really
do
appreciate
all
the
hard
work
from
all
the
additional
parties
involved
and
all
the
hard
work
from
my
colleagues
and
the
15,000
pages
that
we
had
to
go
through
and
I
really
appreciate
the
restating
our
role
in
this
process
as
well.
The
fact
that
if
it
was
not
in
the
Hearing
Examiner
record,
it
could
not
be
part
of
our
decision-making
process.
E
G
I
I
also
thank
all
the
parties
for
the
amount
of
time
they
spent
working
on
this.
This
is
a
very
large
amount
of
Records
and
the
role
that
we
take
on
here
is
different
than
our
regular
role
of
being
quasi-judicial
and
looking
at
the
closed
record
after
taking
the
time
to
look
through
and
review.
All
of
the
records
independently.
C
Yes,
I
certainly
grieves
all
the
comments
have
been
made
by
my
colleagues
and
join
the
comments
of
the
mayor
and
council
member
Lee
in
this
and
I
would
move
to
deny
the
appeals
of
the
hearing.
Examiner's
decision
to
approve
PSC's
application
for
a
conditional
use
permit
for
the
South
Bellevue
segment
of
the
energized
Eastside
project
and
to
direct
the
City
Attorney's
Office
to
draft
an
ordinance
denying
the
appeals
incorporating
and
adopting
the
findings
of
fact
and
conclusions
of
law
for
the
from
the
hearing.
C
A
F
A
So
that
will
come
back
to
us
on
December,
2nd
for
action
that
will
be
separate
action.
We
will
take
a
vote
on
that
as
well.
We
currently
are
still
under
the
quasi
judicial
proceedings,
so
we
cannot
have
interaction.
You
won't
see
us
talking
to
the
press
about
this.
That
will
certainly
go
through
actually
perhaps
Smith's
miss
gorilla.
Could
you
give
us
just
a
little
a
little
information
on
how
long
this
goes
and
and
the
restrictions
on
camera.
B
With
anyone
about
this
and
or
with
the
press-
and
it
remains
to
be
seen
after
the
council's
decision-
whether
this
proceeding
will
continue
on
in
the
court
system
it
may,
and
so
during
the
pendency
of
this
proceeding,
the
council
members
will
not
be
able
to
talk
to
parties
about
your
decision
or
about
the
case,
there's
the
possibility.
It
could
eventually
get
remanded
back
that
I'm
not
saying
it
will,
but
because
there's
always
the
possibility
that
that
could
happen.
You
cannot
continue
to
have
or
cannot
have
an
ex
parte
communications
with
parties
about
this
case.
D
Louses
we
have
taken
the
action
I
want
to
express
the
Centurion
everybody
has
you
did
we
want
to
sincerely
thank
all
the
people
apparent
and
everybody
else
who
have
worked
so
hard
and
put
so
much
energy
into
such
a
subject?
That's
dear
to
everybody,
what's
he
involving
affecting
the
community?
So
thank
you
all
very
much.
Thank.