The Montlake eFlyer

Text Box: I The Montlake Observer
n Candidate Statements (cont.)
s Notices and Announcements
i Community Proceedings
d MCC Board Meeting Minutes
e MCC General Meeting Minutes
Letters to the editor
0 Candidates respond to MCC Resolution on SR-520

Pursuant to the resolution passed at the October General Membership meeting, MCC sent the Club’s position statement, along with a request for response, to mayoral and city council candidates in the upcoming election. The Club was able to reach nine candidates (Mayoral candidates Nickels and Sidran; City Council candidates Conlin, Drago, McIver, Licata, Preston, Firestone, and Cogswell) in time to receive responses for publication in this issue of The Montlake Flyer: Written responses were received from candidates Nichels, Conlin, Drago, McIver, Licata, Preston, Firestone, and Cogswell. An oral response from Ann Marshall of the Sidran campaign was transcribed by Dia Solagga and is also included. Unfortunately, we were unable to contact Council candidate Peter Olive in time to include his response in this issue. Should Mr. Olive wish to send a response that would be published after the election, we will include his response in the December issue.

Mayoral Candidate Statements

Greg Nickels

Any proposed solution to the 520-expansion issue must meet two basic principles in order to receive my support.

1. No new general-purpose capacity should be added. In the event capacity is needed, it must be reserved for only high-capacity modes such as car pools or buses.

2. If in fact changes are made and existing urban Seattle neighborhoods are affected, it is not only necessary to mitigate the future impacts, but all past unmitigated impacts must be addressed as well.

Therefore, I support the spirit of your resolutions in such that capacity should be added in only limited circumstances and real mitigation must be provided to those neighborhoods impacted.

Mark Sidran

Mr. Sidran’s press secretary Ann Marshall informed Dia Solagga via telephone that, “The campaign is so busy at this point we will not be able to respond to the letter at this time. Thank you very much. We wish you the best.”

Note that at time of going to print, Mr. Sidran was scheduled to discuss Trans-Lake Washington project issues with Montlake residents at an informal meeting arranged by Shelby-Hamlin neighbors.

Seattle City Council Candidate Statements

Council Position 2

Richard Conlin

Thank you for your letter asking me to comment on the Resolution concerning the present state of the Trans-Lake Washington project. As a Seattle representative on the Trans-Lake Washington Committee, I have worked to support the interests of Seattle neighborhoods in the context of the regional transportation issues of the 520 corridor.

As you know, the City Council passed a resolution in 1997 defining parameters for the 520 project. The special concern of the Council was to ensure that the new bridge and corridor do not encourage more single-occupancy vehicle traffic and consequently increase congestion on I-5 and Seattle neighborhood streets. It is clear that the bridge needs to be replaced in order to prevent its further deterioration, and that the replacement should be designed to promote safety and a smoother traffic flow. In addition, any changes in the design should encourage the use of transit and high occupancy vehicles and not encourage more SOVs.

I will support implementation of an alternative that follows those prescriptions, namely one that will replace the bridge, provide shoulders and a bicycle path, fully mitigate environmental impacts, and include a major commitment to transportation demand management. I would hope that the rebuild will include provisions for HOV lanes and the possibility of mass transit capacity to be added in the future. I think this is consistent with the position of the Montlake Community Club.

Having other options in the EIS process has turned out to be very useful exercise. Because of the data developed about the impact of additional general purpose lanes on Eastside arterials, a number of Eastside representatives have backed away from their former advocacy of adding general purpose lanes. Only by fully studying alternatives will it be possible to build agreement among the principal parties who will have to work together to address the transportation bottleneck of 520. The status quo is not acceptable.

For that reason, I am reluctant to commit to not studying the environmental impacts of proposals such as alternative interchange designs or a second crossing. If they, in fact, have the negative impacts you suggest, it is the whole purpose of the EIS process to reveal that. Leaving them off the table will make it difficult to come to a rational conclusion. I can certainly understand the alarm and concern that some of the proposals cause, particularly in the Hamlin-Shelby area, and I will work hard to protect the residents of Hamlin-Shelby. However, it may be possible to protect those interests and find a new option that will assist with the traffic problem, and we should look for creative ways to achieve that.

Michael Preston

I am in support of the Montlake Community Club position holding the line on expansion of the 520 ROW through the Montlake community.

As a boy, growing up in Seattle, I was a frequent visitor to the wetlands and waterways of the Montlake and Arboretum area. I used to collect frogs there and take them home. Of course, as soon as my mother discovered them, back I would go to return them to the water.

There are no more frogs in the water there. The result of the R.H. Thompson development was a devastating destruction of the natural environment. In all of these years, it has not recovered. Currently, the will does not exist to aid in this recovery, if indeed it is possible. This area cannot sustain any further assault. For this reason alone, further expansion of 520 in this area is unacceptable.

Furthermore, until a rational and effective transportation plan, including a thorough redevelopment of the ill-advised light rail program, is completed, planning for cross-lake improvements should be delayed. Transit planning for the Seattle metropolitan area requires a coordinated and integrated planning process that does not allow one part to leap ahead before critical decisions are finalized in the other parts.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to respond to your position. I look forward to working with your community on this issue.

Council Position 4

Jan Drago

In April 1997 I supported the original City of Seattle Trans-Lake Resolution (29574). I continue to support it and the Resolution of the Montlake Community Club as well as A SEATTLE ALTERNATIVE. More vehicles coming into Seattle will only further congest and gridlock our highways. Furthermore we don’t have additional parking capacity. We must contain this project within the existing right of way. The only solution/alternative that I can support is to expand transit alternatives. The I-90 bridge was built to accommodate light rail. I think light rail should go on I-90 and elevated transit on SR520. That elevated transit could be monorail. It could connect with a Seattle monorail or light rail and go to the University of Washington, downtown or cross-town.

Curt Firestone

I fully support the Resolution of the Montlake Community Club as adopted on September 12, 2001. This resolution clearly reflects the needs of:

1. The City of Seattle to protect its local streets from increases in vehicle activity that the streets are not able to absorb.

2. The Puget Sound regional need for increased trans Lake Washington capacity, especially in the 520 corridor and north.

3. Protection of our shorelines, wetlands, parks ,residential and university grounds.

I will only support increased 520 capacity for mass transit and van/car pools. I applaud the idea of containing those increases within the current right of way.

I also urge the Regional Transit Authority to move forward with building mass transit on the I-90 corridor utilizing the bridge lanes constructed for that purpose. By fully implementing I-90 mass transit with systems which serve the entire Eastside, we will lessen the need for 520 expansion. “The Seattle Alternative” is to be complemented and supported.

Council Position 6

Peter Olive

We regret that we were unable to contact Mr. Olive in time for his response to be included in this issue of The Montlake Flyer. Mr. Olive’s statement in the Voters Pamphlet identifies him as a Capitol Hill resident who favors affordable housing, green space and transportation alternatives that will diminish ground traffic.

Nick Licata

I’ve read over the Resolution regarding the Trans-lake Washington (SR-520) Project and support it.

Council Position 8

Richard McIver

As the chair of the City Council’s Transportation Committee I have served as one of the City’s representatives on the Trans Lake Study Group for the past five years. As such, I have become deeply immersed in the myriad of issues relating to the 520 bridge, the need for its replacement in the not too distant future, the potential impacts it could have on Seattle’s already gridlocked traffic, and the impact a new structure could have on neighborhoods (particularly Montlake, Portage Bay, and Eastlake).

First, it should go without saying that Seattle simply cannot absorb ANY additional single occupancy vehicles from 520. It makes no sense to expand the capacity of 520 when I-5 and city arterials lack additional capacity. The ONLY additional lane capacity I would support for a new 520 bridge would be for transit and carpool with consideration for future mass transit. (In addition, mitigation should begin with construction of the noise walls at Eastlake for the I-5 express lanes, as promised when I-5 was built.)

A new 520 bridge will have to be built, as the existing structure reaches the end of its useful life expectancy. It is also clear that the new structure will have to be built while the existing structure continues to operate.

As requested by the Hamlin-Shelby neighborhood, it is reasonable to demand WSDOT study whether the construction of the new bridge can be completed within the existing 520 ROW. After meeting with representatives from the Hamlin-Shelby neighborhood about this issue, I met with the Director of Seattle Transportation, who in turn met with WSDOT officials and expressed this position on behalf of the City. If the new structure can’t be built within the existing footprint, the state should have to demonstrate that any ROW additions be justified and contiguous.

Grant Cogswell

I wholeheartedly support the Montlake Community Club’s resolution on the Trans-Lake Washington project and the Montlake-Hamlin-Shelby Residents’ Seattle Alternative. I oppose any widening of SR-520 and any increase of capacity for single-occupancy vehicles. Such increased capacity would put more traffic on our streets, destroy neighborhoods and wetlands near the lake, and serve to fuel sprawl on the Eastside. It is a proven fact that automobile traffic fills whatever accommodation is given it: the expansion of I-90 ten years ago gave us our current traffic congestion and allowed for the sprawl east of Bellevue we have seen in the 90’s, with dire ecological consequences, and negative impacts on our traffic and quality of life. I am running against the Transportation chair, Richard McIver, because he has failed to provide a plan for comprehensive and viable mass transit. I co-authored and ran the campaign for the Monorail Initiative, which is now planning fast, high-capacity transit for a West Seattle - Ballard corridor. I think it likely I can get the Transportation chair, and Mr. McIver’s seat on the Sound Transit board, should I win. I will use that position to promote sensible mass transit (not Sound Transit’s $4 billion streetcar) and to prevent more bridges across Lake Washington. Your efforts are crucial to preserving this city’s character and environment. I hope I can count on your support in this race. Thank you.

Local Heroes Dept

Congratulations to Anna Davidson, Allison Steinberg and Elizabeth Boardman! You may have noticed these three young patriots selling lemonade at the five-way stop on September 15 and 16. What you may not know is that they raised $1,201 for the Red Cross on those days! Their flag-festooned lemonade stand drew a lot of donations and supportive honks, but nobody could top the anonymous neighbor who strolled down with a $500 check!

New portable at Montlake Elementary

Principal Claudia Allan and her staff have been lobbying hard for additional space, and this month their efforts are paying off. A new portable classroom is on the way, tentatively scheduled for delivery on Saturday, the 27^th. At this writing, the people from Ness Crane are still scratching their heads and laying plans for the installation (levitation?) at the NW corner of the playground. We’ve got our fingers crossed that all goes well. So do Maureen Forbes and her lucky first-grade students!

Montlake Scores Stratospheric!

Claudia and her staff have another reason to be proud these days. Montlake recently scored ninth statewide in the Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) reading tests that are administered annually to fourth graders. Every fourth grader at Montlake was tested, including special ed kids, and 95.3% of the students met or exceeded the test requirements. Many of our surrounding schools in the city did not even place in the top 100, so these results prove yet again what Montlake parents already know—that their kids are getting a private school-quality education in a small, loving, neighborhood public school.

MEETING CALENDAR

Trans-Lake Washington Project status briefing: 6:30pm, Wednesday, November 7, West modular building at Montlake Community Center. Public is encouraged to attend.

MCC Board Meeting: 7:30pm, Wednesday, November 7, west modular building at Montlake Community Center.

Beautification Committee Report

By Mimi DeBurle

When I took over as the Beautification Committee Chairperson, I had a rosy picture of all the things that could be done to improve Montlake. The first thing on the agenda was the triangle at 23^rd and Newton that was of overgrown with blackberries and other noxious weeds, that it was impossible to walk on the sidewalk. This summer the Montlake Community Club applied for a Small-and-Simple matching grant from the City of Seattle to improve the triangle. In order to qualify for the grant we had to match the funds provided by the city with either volunteer labor or cash. There were enough volunteer hours pledged to meet the match, so we went forth with the application, and were successful in getting the grant.

There were a few volunteers who put in more time than they should have had to, some volunteers who put in the number of hours they had pledged, or at least pretty close to that, and a good many people who had pledged hours that either put in none at all, or only a small part of the hours they had pledged. In spite of the lack of support, the work at 23^rd and Newton should be nearly complete by the time you receive this Flyer.

I want to thank those volunteers who met or more than met their commitment, and express my disappoint in those who just found themselves too busy to spend a few hours doing what they had agreed to do. Those of you who did not meet your commitment might be interested in making a financial contribution for those costs that were not covered by the grant.

I think there may have been some mystery volunteers who may have worked, but never signed one of the worksheets. If this sounds like you, please contact me at 322-8660, so I can get you signed up. We need every possible hour accounted for to ensure that we meet our match commitment.

The other plans I had for improving the community no longer seem very feasible when I realize how little community support there is for these kind of projects. A few people just can’t do it all.

Transportation Committee Update

By Jonathan Dubman

The Transportation Committee, chaired by Jonathan Dubman, is an informal group that will be meeting regularly to establish an ongoing, well-informed dialogue in the community on such important issues as arterial congestion, pedestrian safety, transit, parking enforcement and various large-scale projects in the works. Willing attendees will volunteer to follow up on certain issues. The next meeting will be held Wednesday, November 28 at 7:30pm, at the west modular building at the Montlake Community Center. All are welcome!

On October 17, Jean Leed, Ron Stenkamp, Ron Butler, Jeff Wood, Don Argus and Jonathan Dubman were in attendance. We discussed Sound Transit’s plans to conduct a study for what may be a very long-term plan to route Link light rail from downtown to the University District. One of the routes under consideration is a tunnel under Montlake with a potential station near the stadium and hospital. Ron Endlich at Sound Transit is in charge of this segment of the project. There will be ample opportunity for Montlake residents to comment on the project as an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process is conducted. Stay tuned for more details.

The group discussed traffic speeding and safety issues on arterials. (A police officer I spoke to reported ticketing one driver at 61 mph on 24^th Avenue!) We discussed the unresponsive pedestrian-activated walk light at 24^th and McGraw. Don Argus suggested some potential street design concepts for 24^th to discourage speeding and improve pedestrian safety, such as moving bus stops, adjusting the lane striping, adding parking, and adding a new traffic light. Jonathan Dubman will follow up with Jon Layzer at the Strategic Planning Office to see what it would take to study the issue. At the very least for the near-term, we need much better enforcement. Jean Leed volunteered to follow up on our prior enforcement request with Seattle Police.

The group shared things we’ve recently learned about the Trans-Lake Washington Project. Jean Leed, who is a member of the project’s Advisory Committee, reiterated her commitment to support Montlake’s recent resolutions on this. For discussion’s sake, Jonathan Dubman introduced the concept of congestion pricing, a peak-hour electronic toll for single-occupant vehicles, as a better way to meter the bridge and encourage transit use and carpooling. The group saw both potential advantages and challenges of this.

Come if you can to the University Area Transportation Study Open House, Thursday, November 15 from 5 to 8pm at Gould Hall, at the corner of 40^th and the Ave, to see and comment on some fairly radical concepts for Montlake Blvd., Pacific, and the University Bridge. Stay tuned to the Montlake Forum on www.Montlake.net for web links and timely announcements of other public meetings.

NEDC Meeting Report

By Paul Gibson

October 2001: The October meeting of the NEDC was devoted to discussion of Park Department plans regarding lighting of playfields, the Medic I levy on the November ballot, Mayor Schell’s proposed budget and provision of an automatic public toilet in the University District.

Regarding field lighting, the NEDC decided to encourage the City Council to follow the recommendation of a group that seeks to protect neighbors of playfields by scaling back on the Park Department plans for the intensity and hours of lighting. These plans pertain particularly to fields equipped with artificial turf.

Regarding the other topics, no action was taken beyond a recommendation to encourage all voters to inform themselves about the Medic I levy and vote according their preferences.

Board Meeting Minutes

September 5, 2001 Meeting called to order at 7:30pm. In attendance were: Clarissa Easton, President, Jonathan Dubman, Vice President, and Board Members Marty Lindemann, Don Argus, Jeannine Jacobson, Shane Doran, John Hutchinson, Neil Weschler, Scott Coughlin and Mike Storie.

Officers: Clarissa Easton announced that Carolyn Amick has resigned from the Board because she has moved to Vashon. Clarissa Easton said that so far she has not been able to find a candidate to appoint as interim Secretary. Mike Storie volunteered to fill the post until the next election. He was then appointed to fill that position.

By-Laws: Don Argus has been chairing an ad hoc By-Laws task force to look into the role and operation of the resolution process. A discussion ensued concerning such fundamental issues as the purpose of the club, the purpose of the resolution process, and mechanisms by which resolutions can be made to reflect the actual will of the majority of households in the neighborhood. It was agreed that the process needs some "tuning," which will probably require an amendment to the by-laws. The by-laws task force was made more formal, with Don Argus as its chair. The task force will hold meetings to discuss these issues. Anyone interested is encouraged to contact Don at 324-1580 or argus@thl-arch.com.

Frank Chopp, Pat Thibaudeau and Patty Murray have asked if they could speak to the Club regarding 43rd district issues. They will be invited to speak at the November general meeting.

Plans are being developed for improvements and additions to the facilities at the Montlake Community Center. The options will be presented to the membership at an upcoming meeting.

There will be a transportation committee meeting, chaired by Jonathan Dubman, at the Montlake Community Center modular building on Wednesday, October 17 at 7:30pm.

The Museum of History and Industry (MOHAI) will be celebrating its 50^th anniversary in February. They would like to plan some sort of get together with the Montlake Community Club.

Meeting adjourned at 8:50 PM.

Next MCC Board meeting: Wednesday, November 7, 7:30pm in the west, modular building at Montlake Community Center.

General Meeting Minutes

October 10, 2001 President Clarissa Easton called the meeting to order at 7:40pm. A quorum was present.

Announcements: Vice President Jonathan Dubman announced that the Transportation Committee, which he chairs, will be having regular meetings, the first of which was held at the Modular Building at the Community Center at 6:30pm on Wednesday, October 17. Anyone interested in the many transportation issues facing our neighborhood should contact Jonathan at 322-8899.

Committee Report: Mimi DeBurle, Chair of the Beautification Committee, requested volunteers to help cleaning and landscaping the vacant lots that the Community Club maintains. We have received a small grant from the City and need to match it with volunteer labor. A work party was planned on the weekend of October 13-14, but there will be many other opportunities. Contact Mimi at 322-8660.

Candidate Presentation: Grant Cogswell, candidate for Seattle City Council was introduced and outlined his perspective on the city’s transportation problems—and their solutions. He is running against Richard McIver and would like to replace him as chair of the Transportation Committee. He feels that building more road capacity is not worthwhile and that Sound Transit’s light rail system is quickly turning into a boondoggle.

While he was very active in the Monorail initiative, Mr. Cogswell said that he is not in love with any given technology, but it has to make sense. He can be contacted at 206-726-0570 or www.cogswellforseattle.org

Public Agency Presentation: Thomas Rasmussen, the Director of the Mayor’s Office for Senior Citizens, made a presentation about the many services for seniors that the city provides. One of the most popular is the utility discount for seniors over 65 years of age and whose income is less than 70% of the state median income. This presently translates to $21,400 for an individual or $29,000 for a couple.

Other programs include Senior Information and Assistance, Help for Caregivers, Senior Advocates, free theater tickets from arts groups, and a Gold Card, which allows for discounts for seniors at many businesses. There is a directory of these businesses available. For more information on city services for seniors, call 684-0494.

Neighborhood Disaster Preparedness: Clarissa Easton has personally taken on the task of getting the Montlake neighborhood better prepared for an emergency. For some time, the city has had a program for emergency preparedness called "SDART" (Seattle Disaster Aid & Response Teams). The program covers both natural and man-made disasters, both of which have taken on a much greater urgency during the past year.

The key to this program is to set up groups or routes of 25 to 50 households. The city will send a representative to meet with these groups for 90 minutes to teach how to be better prepared and how best to help ourselves and each other if needed. A Block Coordinator and six Disaster Response Teams will be organized. They are Communications, Damage Assessment, First Aid, Safety & Security, Light Search & Rescue, and Sheltering & Special Needs.

It is recommended that each household be able to sustain itself for three days (food, water, first aid) without outside assistance.

Four or five people at the meeting volunteered to host groups of neighbors for this training. However, to completely cover Montlake’s 1,200 households, it will take as many as 24 such groups.

If anyone is interested in learning more about this important program, or in volunteering to host a group, please contact Clarissa Easton at 726-8988 or ceeaston@uswest.net. The meeting was adjourned at 9:05pm

Letters to the Editor

Editor:

We’re Hamlin-Shelby residents who support the resolution adopted in the September MCC meeting. In reading the letters to the editor on the topic in the October Montlake Flyer, it is clear to us that our position was not clearly understood. One letter suggested the resolution takes a position against every alternative presented by the DOT. That is definitely not the case. Our position does, we believe, hold the best hope of a solution to the transportation needs of wider Seattle. It has, in fact, been extremely favorably received by every city and state representative we’ve presented it to. Additionally, the representatives we’ve discussed our position with have been pleasantly surprised by how, contrary to Montlake’s reputation for being obstructionist, this proposal actually supports positive change. Obviously we communicated our position more clearly in other meetings than we did at the MCC. In hopes of clarifying, I'll outline our position in perhaps clearer language:

1. We agree that there is a transportation crisis in this area and we support expanding capacity (for more people, not more cars) in the 520 corridor, as long as we can do so in an effective and environmentally sensitive way.

2. We want the Trans-Lake Washington Project to include in the upcoming Environmental Impact Study a modified option 3A such that all expansion is contained within the existing right-of-way.

§ The options the Project has currently outlined (other than “do nothing”) would all move the freeway as much as 200 feet to the north of the existing highway, and involve adding a second crossing that would connect 520 via bridge or tunnel at Pacific, near the Triangle garage.

These encroachments would do significant and lasting damage to our neighborhood, the MOHAI building, and critical natural habitats, and are unacceptable to our neighborhood.
Previous plans show that what is now outlined as option 3A can be contained within the existing highway right-of-way. Option 3A specifies that the additional lane in each direction should be for transit and HOV only, and that no lanes be added for single occupancy vehicles. Bridge planners, city and state officials freely admit that our city streets and freeways are already past saturation point cannot absorb any more cars.

3. The Montlake Hamlin-Shelby neighborhood is an historically important neighborhood worth preserving for all Seattle, as it is:

§ Surrounded by unique and critical wetland and park areas

§ A crossroads and destination for thousands of people throughout the region

§ A strong, cohesive neighborhood.

Passing the resolution was an important step in our working constructively with the Trans-Lake Washington Project in addressing the transportation issues facing us that so directly impact Montlake. We’re grateful for all of the support we received at the meeting from people living in other parts of Montlake than just the east side of Hamlin-Shelby. It is that community support that makes Montlake such a wonderful neighborhood.

--Kristine and Doug Forbes

Editor:

There is a mistaken impression that the Hamlin-Shelby Residents oppose any and all attempts to “improve” the SR-520 highway. The reality is—and the following “Seattle Alternative” proposal makes this clear—Hamlin-Shelby proposes a separate SR-520 approach very different from designs so far put forward by the Trans-Lake Project, and are asking that the Project make this one of the alternatives to be studied in the Project’s EIS. The text of the following Hamlin-Shelby “Seattle Alternative” petition should speak for itself.

To the Trans-Lake Washington Project and the Mayor and City Council of the City of Seattle:

The residents of the Hamlin-Shelby neighborhood recognize that the City of Seattle, including this Montlake Community, suffers from an urgent transportation crisis. We also recognize that congestion in the SR-520 corridor is a significant piece of that crisis, and agree that measures to improve SR-520’s capacity are urgently needed.

At the same time, we are convinced that these capacity improvements can be accomplished without further destruction of natural or built environments, or by relocating traffic congestion problems to other parts of the City’s arterial and freeway system, such as the I-5 Corridor and Northeast Pacific Street.

We therefore ask that the Trans-Lake Washington Project develop an alternative to be studied in the Project's forthcoming EIS, based on criteria stated in the 1997 City of Seattle Resolution (Res. 29574). The elements of this alternative are listed below as "The Seattle Alternative." We further ask that the City of Seattle vigorously support this Petition by formally requesting that this alternative be included in the Trans-Lake Washington EIS.

“THE SEATTLE ALTERNATIVE”

a. That the completed project be contained within the current right-of-way, which previous SR-520 project proposals have shown can easily accommodate at least six lanes of traffic, plus off-ramps, shoulders, overpass and lid structures and necessary clearances.

b. Enlarge the existing SR-520 freeway to no more than six lanes, two of which shall be for transit, van and carpools only.

c. Construct no additional ramps, especially no such ramps or freeway extensions across the Montlake Cut.

d. Fully mitigate or avoid SR-520’s environmental impacts, existing and proposed, on built and natural environments within Seattle.

e. Assume that the City of Seattle will embark on a initiative to enact Transportation Demand Management (TDM) legislation, to be adopted in conjunction with adoption of any proposals for Trans-Lake Washington capacity improvements.

--Dia Salogga

Volume 35, Number 9 November 2001

Board Meeting Minutes

General Meeting Minutes