#02 Extend health care and related benefits to domestic partners of qualifying City & Library employees (File Res. #2012-863)
HUMAN RESOURCES DIVISION MEMORANDUM
February 13, 2012
TO: City Council
FROM: Susan A. Musick, Human Resources Director
SUBJECT: Action on a Proposed Resolution Extending Health Care & Related
Benefits to Domestic Partners of Qualifying City & Library Employees (File
Resolution No. 2012-863)
Executive Summary
Council Members Liebert and Rashkin requested that the City consider granting health
plan benefits to the domestic partners of eligible City employees, and funeral leave to
employees with domestic partners. As a result of this inquiry, the Human Resources
Division:
1. Conducted a survey of Wisconsin Public Employers Labor Relations Association
(WPELRA) to see if member cities, counties, or technical colleges provide
benefits to domestic partners, and if so, what are the benefits, and eligibility
criteria.
2. Reviewed the matter with our health plan third party administrator to obtain their
thoughts and advice.
It is difficult to estimate the number of City and Library employees who have a domestic
partner. Currently, there are 70 unmarried employees with single medical plan
coverage. However, we don’t track the number of single parents with family medical
plan coverage, and who live with a domestic partner. There are unknowns in adding this
benefit, making the City’s cost impact difficult to predict. Based on the experience of
other employers with this coverage, the estimated cost could range from less than 1%
to 5% of medical claims per year.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of extending the funeral leave benefit to Administrative and
General Municipal employees with domestic partners. There is no staff recommendation
on extending health plan benefits to the domestic partners of employees.
City Manager Recommendation
The City Manager recommends extending the funeral leave benefit to domestic partners
and that any other administrative policy leave changes in the future that do not have a
direct financial impact be extended to domestic partners.
1
I cannot recommend extending health insurance benefits currently based on the fact
that we are reviewing health insurance benefits and other benefits may be impacted in
2013.
Suggested Motion
If Council decides to approve these benefits, then the proposed motion would be “I
move to approve File Resolution Number 2012-863.”
Key Points to Consider
1. The experience of other public sector employers indicates that the additional cost
for domestic partner benefits is approximately 1% of their health plan costs.
2. At the same time, there is an unknown and potentially high risk to extend health
care benefits to the domestic partners of employees.
3. The City is not aware of any difficulties in recruiting because of the lack of
domestic partner benefits.
4. Most Wisconsin counties and municipalities do not offer domestic partner
benefits unless they are part of the State Health Plan.
5. Adding domestic partner health plan benefits would result in added administrative
work.
6. Implementing benefit changes vary by employee group:
A. Benefit changes may be implemented for Administrative (non-represented)
employees, and General Municipal (DPW) employees under the new
collective bargaining law.
B. The City would have a duty to bargain this health plan eligibility change with
Transit Union employees.
C. Based upon a pending lawsuit, the City’s obligation in the case of Police and
Fire Unions is unclear. An Eau Claire County ruling is expected in the next
couple of weeks that should clarify if the City may unilaterally offer domestic
partner benefits to these two Unions, or has a duty to bargain the change.
Current Benefits for City Employees with Domestic Partners
Under the Wisconsin Family and Medical Leave (FMLA), the City allows employees to
take state FMLA for the serious health condition of his or her domestic partner and for
the parent of the domestic partner.
Under the Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS), employees may purchase life
insurance coverage for his or her domestic partner, the same as an employee would
make this purchase for his or her spouse.
Survey Results
A survey was distributed by email to approximately 107 employer members of the
th
WPELRA on 8 September 2011, with a requested return date of September 16. In
response, 38 completed surveys were returned.
2
1. Of those responding to the question regarding their definition of domestic partner
(same gender, opposite gender, or both), four respondents indicated they follow
the Wisconsin Statute definition (40.02.(21d)), which is copied and pasted below.
"Domestic partnership" means a relationship between 2 individuals that satisfies all
of the following:
(a) Each individual is at least 18 years old and otherwise competent to enter into a
contract.
(b) Neither individual is married to, or in a domestic partnership with, another
individual.
(c) The 2 individuals are not related by blood in any way that would prohibit
marriage under s. 765.03.
(d) The 2 individuals consider themselves to be members of each other's
immediate family.
(e) The 2 individuals agree to be responsible for each other's basic living expenses.
(f) The 2 individuals share a common residence. Two individuals may share a
common residence even if any of the following applies:
1. Only one of the individuals has legal ownership of the residence.
2. One or both of the individuals have one or more additional residences not shared
with the other individual.
3. One of the individuals leaves the common residence with the intent to return.
2. All employers are responsible to grant Wisconsin FMLA for the serious health
condition of a domestic partner and the domestic partner’s parent, as State law
provides.
3. All employers with WRS are responsible to offer spouse and dependent life
insurance to employees’ domestic partners, at the employee’s expense.
4. Two employers allow employees to have paid time off for bereavement or funeral
leave for the domestic partner (City of Appleton and Rock County).
5. Two employers allow employees to use sick leave for the illness of a domestic
partner (City of Appleton and Price County).
1
6. Two employers with the State Health Plan offer health insurance to employees’
domestic partners (City of Fitchburg, Western Wisconsin Cares).
7. One employer with their own Health Plan offers health coverage to employees’
domestic partners (City of Appleton for same gender domestic partners).
8. Most employers do not require same gender relationship to be registered with
their home County.
9. The WRS requires employees and their domestic partners complete an affidavit
so that the employee’s domestic partner may receive WRS related benefits, e.g.,
life insurance, health insurance.
Although the City of Madison did not respond to the survey, a review of their website
indicates that the City participates in the State Health Plan and WRS, and therefore
offers health and life insurance to the domestic partners of their employees.
1
The State Health Plan provides domestic partners coverage.
3
Although the City of Milwaukee did not respond to the survey, a review of their website
indicates that the City offers health and dental benefits to the domestic partners of their
employees for 18 of the City’s 25 Unions. The children of domestic partners are not
covered by the City’s health and dental plans.
Third Party Administrator
For health plan purposes, our third party claims administrator can implement any
decision the City should make in this matter. Points that our third party administrator
brought up include:
1. Our stop loss insurer needs to be notified of, and approve, an eligibility change.
2. Domestic partner must be clearly defined.
3. If the City is going to make this change, then an open enrollment must be
scheduled to allow employees to enroll their domestic partner.
4. An effective date must be identified for when the domestic partners would have
coverage.
5. Dean’s insured business offers health plan benefits to domestic partners. Dean
requires that the employee and his or her domestic partner complete an affidavit,
and provide proof of their common residence.
Cost Impact
An employer takes on risk whenever it enrolls an employee and/or dependent onto the
health plan. The experience of some other municipalities indicates that adding domestic
partners has a cost of less than 1% per year. This would equal to approximately
$70,000 per year for the City (based upon estimated 2012 medical claims). However,
other studies urge caution that adverse selection of high-risk enrollees could result in
cost increases of 3% to 5% if only 1% or 2% of the employees choose domestic partner
benefits. For the City, this level of cost increase equates to $210,000 to $350,000 per
year. The difficulty of adverse selection is that the City won’t know the cost impact until
it occurs.
Funeral Leave
Currently, the City does not have this benefit for employees with domestic partners.
However, the Human Resources Department recommends extending the funeral leave
benefit (up to three days) for the death of a domestic partner of an Administrative
employee or General Municipal (DPW) Employee. The police, fire, and transit unions
would need to bargain for this benefit improvement.
C: Eric J. Levitt, City Manager
Jacob J. Winzenz, Director of Administrative Services & Assistant City Manager
4
RESOLUTION NO. 2012-863
A RESOLUTION TO EXTEND HEALTH CARE AND RELATED PACKAGE BENEFTS TO
ALL OTHERWISE QUALIFYING CITY AND LIBRARY DOMESTIC PARTNER EMPLOYEES
AND THEIR FAMILIES
WHEREAS the City and Library have a non-discrimination policy which states all persons are
given equal consideration without regard to race, creed (religion), color, sex, national origin,
handicap as defined in the Americans with Disability Act, ancestry, arrest or conviction record,
marital status, membership in Military Reserve, sexual orientation, or age..."; and
WHEREAS the City and Library are committed to being a leader within the community with
regard to diversity..."; and
WHEREAS, the City and Library are committed to equal treatment of all employee families and
couples; an inequity currently exists concerning certain employee benefits for same gender
and opposite gender employees that is contrary to a fundamental sense of human fairness;
and
WHEREAS, employers compensate employees through more than just wages and salary by
providing benefits such as health plan coverage, with the traditional benefits structure including
an employee's opposite-sex spouse and children;
WHEREAS, extension of all benefits not currently required by law to be extended to same
gender and opposite gender employees and their families would satisfy this fundamental
fairness inequity and be in the best interest of and benefit to the City and the Library, its
employees, taxpayers, and community; and
WHEREAS, such extension of benefits including, but not limited to, health care, prescription
drug, dental, and vision care benefit packages and funeral leave to same gender and opposite
gender domestic partners who otherwise would qualify (e.g. vesting requirements, hours per
week, etc.) would increase the attractiveness of the City and the Library’s employment benefit
package, thus, significantly facilitating successful employee recruitment and retention; and
WHEREAS, current societal standards as annunciated by the State of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
County, the Cities of Madison, Milwaukee, Fitchburg, Appleton, other Wisconsin communities,
many institutions of higher education, and private sector employers is to extend health care
and related benefit packages to all qualifying same gender and opposite gender domestic
partners and their families; and
WHEREAS, Wis. Stats. Sec. 40.02(21d) provides some by limited guidance as to the definition
of “domestic partners” for Wisconsin Retirement System and certain State health insurance
benefit purposes; and
WHEREAS, although it is difficult to estimate the number of City and Library employees who
have domestic partners, a health plan cost impact range is estimated from 1% ($70,000) to 5%
($350,000) of health costs per year.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Janesville that
this Council stands for the proposition that same gender and opposite gender domestic
partners be allowed access to and provided all of the same health care, prescription drug,
dental, vision care, and other benefits, rights, and privileges, which are extended to opposite
gender spouse relationships to which the latter are currently and, from time to time, may be
entitled, and as are allowed by the IRS, commencing January 1, 2013, to the extent allowed by
law; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Council requests and directs that the City
Administration:
(a) Study and consult with the City’s health care advisors and others to determine
appropriate definitions, standards, and related administrative procedures and processes
for such extension; and
(b) Extend health care, prescription drug, dental, and vision care to all qualifying opposite
gender and same gender domestic partners of Administrative, General Municipal, and
Library employees, and their children commencing January 1, 2013, to the extent
allowed by law; and
(c) Negotiate as appropriate, the extension of health care, prescription drug, dental, and
vision care to all qualifying opposite gender and same gender domestic partners of
Union employees and their children during collective bargaining negotiations for 2013,
to the extent allowed by law; and
(d) Extend the City’s funeral leave benefit to Administrative, General Municipal, and Library
employees with qualifying opposite gender and same gender domestic partners,
commencing January 2013; and
(e) Negotiate as appropriate, the extension of the applicable contractual funeral leave to
Union employees with qualifying opposite gender and same gender domestic partners
during collective bargaining negotiations for 2013, to the extent allowed by law.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Administration include the costs arising from such
extension in the proposed budget for fiscal/calendar year 2013.
ADOPTED:
Motion by:
Second by:
APPROVED:
Councilmember Aye Nay Pass Absent
Dongarra-Adams
Liebert
McDonald
Eric J. Levitt, City Manager
Rashkin
Steeber
ATTEST:
Voskuil
Jean Ann Wulf, City Clerk-Treasurer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney Wald Klimczyk
Proposed by:
Council Members Liebert and Dongarra-Adams
Prepared by:
City Attorney and Human Resources Director
èÔ× úÇÉÓÎ×ÉÉ ùÛÉ× ÖÍÊ øÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ìÛÊÈÎ×Ê ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ
úÇÉÓÎ×ÉÉ×É ÈÔÛÈ ÍÖÖ×Ê ØÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ×ÎÒÍÃ Û ÙÍÏÌ×ÈÓÈÓÆ× ×ØÕ× ÛÎØ Ê×ÓÎÖÍÊÙ× ØÓÆ×ÊÉÓÈà ÛÎØ ÎÍÎ
ØÓÉÙÊÓÏÓÎÛÈÓÍÎ ÌÍÐÓÙÓ×É ÛÎØ ÓÎÓÈÓÛÈÓÆ×É
øÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÛÊ× ÕÍÍØ ÖÍÊ ÚÇÉÓÎ×ÉÉ
øÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÌÊÍÆÓØ× ÛÎ ÓÎ×ÄÌ×ÎÉÓÆ× Ì×ÊÙ×ÎÈ ÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ× ÓÎ Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÙÍÉÈ ×ÎÔÛÎÙ×Ï×ÎÈ
ÈÍ ÈÔ× ÍÆ×ÊÛÐÐ ×ÏÌÐÍÃ×× ÙÍÏÌ×ÎÉÛÈÓÍÎ ÌÛÙÑÛÕ× ÛÎØ ÔÛÆ× Ú×ÙÍÏ× ÍÎ× ÍÖ ÈÔ× ÔÛÐÐÏÛÊÑÉ ÍÖ ÌÊÍÕÊ×ÉÉÓÆ×
ÙÍÏÌÛÎÓ×É ÈÔÛÈ ÆÛÐÇ× ØÓÆ×ÊÉÓÈÃ
øÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÛÊ× ÛÎ ÓÏÌÍÊÈÛÎÈ ÉÈ×Ì ÈÍÅÛÊØ ×ËÇÛÐ ÌÛà ÖÍÊ ×ËÇÛÐ ÅÍÊÑ
ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÙÍÏÌÊÓÉ× Î×ÛÊÐÃ
åÓÈÔÍÇÈ ØÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ Û ÉÓÕÎÓÖÓÙÛÎÈ ÌÍÊÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÍÆ×ÊÛÐÐ ÙÍÏÌ×ÎÉÛÈÓÍÎ ÓÎ ÈÔ× ÖÍÊÏ ÍÖ
ÉÌÍÇÉÛÐ Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÓÉ ÇÎÛÆÛÓÐÛÚÐ× ÈÍ ÕÛà Ð×ÉÚÓÛÎ ÚÓÉ×ÄÇÛÐ ÛÎØ ÈÊÛÎÉÕ×ÎØ×Ê ÅÍÊÑ×ÊÉ
øÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÛÊ× ÛÎ ×ÛÉà ÅÛà ÈÍ ÍÚÈÛÓÎ Û ÙÍÏÌ×ÈÓÈÓÆ× ÛØÆÛÎÈÛÕ× ÖÍÊ ÈÛÐ×ÎÈ ÛÎØ ÈÍ ØÊÓÆ×
Ê×ÙÊÇÓÈÏ×ÎÈ ÛÎØ Ê×È×ÎÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ Ø×ØÓÙÛÈ×Ø ×ÏÌÐÍÃ××É óÖ ÍÎ× ÌÇÊÌÍÉ× ÍÖ Û Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÌÊÍÕÊÛÏ ÓÉ ÈÍ ÌÊÍÆÓØ× Û
ÉÛÖ×Èà Î×È ÖÍÊ ×ÏÌÐÍÃ××É ÛÎØ ÈÔ×ÓÊ ÖÛÏÓÐÓ×É ÈÔ×Ê×Úà ×ÎÛÚÐÓÎÕ ×ÏÌÐÍÃ××É ÈÍ ÖÍÙÇÉ ÏÍÊ× ÍÎ ÈÔ×ÓÊ ÅÍÊÑ
ÈÔ×Î Û ÌÐÛÎ ÈÔÛÈ ØÍ×É ÎÍÈ ÓÎÙÐÇØ× ØÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÓÕÎÍÊ×É Û ÉÓÕÎÓÖÓÙÛÎÈ ÌÍÊÈÓÍÎ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ÅÍÊÑÖÍÊÙ×
íÖÖ×ÊÓÎÕ ØÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ×ÎÉÇÊ×É ÛÎ ×ÏÌÐÍÃ×Ê ÓÉ ÌÊ×ÌÛÊ×Ø ÖÍÊ ÙÔÛÎÕÓÎÕ Ê×ÐÛÈÓÍÎÉÔÓÌ
Ê×ÙÍÕÎÓÈÓÍÎ ÐÛÅÉ ÖÍÊ ÉÛÏ×É×Ä ÙÍÇÌÐ×É ÛÙÊÍÉÉ ÈÔ× çÎÓÈ×Ø éÈÛÈ×É
èÔ× èÊÇ× ùÍÉÈ ÍÖ ìÊÍÆÓØÓÎÕ ô×ÛÐÈÔ ùÛÊ× ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ
ûÙÙÍÊØÓÎÕ ÈÍ ÈÔ× ÷ÏÌÐÍÃ×× ú×Î×ÖÓÈ ê×É×ÛÊÙÔ óÎÉÈÓÈÇÈ× Û
wÖÍÇÎØ ÈÔÛÈ ÓÎ Ì×ÊÙ×ÎÈ ÍÖ ÈÔ× ÍÊÕÛÎÓÂÛÈÓÍÎÉ ÈÔÛÈ ÍÖÖ×Ê ØÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÈÔ×à ÙÍÏÌÊÓÉ× Ð×ÉÉ ÈÔÛÎ
Ì×ÊÙ×ÎÈ ÍÖ ÈÍÈÛÐ Ú×Î×ÖÓÈ ÙÍÉÈÉv èÔ×É× ÖÓÎØÓÎÕÉ ÛÊ× ÙÍÎÉÓÉÈ×ÎÈ ÅÓÈÔ ÈÔ× ×ÄÈ×ÎÉÓÍÎ ÍÖ ØÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÚÃ
ÐÍÙÛÐ ÌÇÚÐÓÙ ÛÎØ ÌÊÓÆÛÈ× ×ÏÌÐÍÃ×ÊÉ ÓÎ åÓÉÙÍÎÉÓÎ
èÔ× ùÓÈà ÍÖ ïÛØÓÉÍÎ ÅÔÓÙÔ ÔÛÉ ÍÖÖ×Ê×Ø ØÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê Ô×ÛÐÈÔ Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÖÍÊ ÙÓÈà ×ÏÌÐÍÃ××É ÉÓÎÙ×
ÖÍÇÎØ ÈÔÛÈ ÈÔ× ÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ× ÓÎ ÙÍÉÈ ÓÎ ÌÊÍÆÓØÓÎÕ Ê×ÓÏÚÇÊÉ×Ï×ÎÈ ÖÍÊ Ô×ÛÐÈÔ ÓÎÉÇÊÛÎÙ× ÖÍÊ ØÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×ÊÉ
ÅÛÉ Î×ÕÐÓÕÓÚÐ× y Û Ð×ÉÉ ÈÔÛÎ ÍÎ× Ì×ÊÙ×ÎÈ ÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ× ÓÎ ÈÔ× ùÓÈÃÉ Ô×ÛÐÈÔ ÙÛÊ× ÚÇØÕ×È
åÔ×Î ÈÔ× ùÓÈà ÍÖ ïÓÐÅÛÇÑ×× ÍÖÖ×Ê×Ø ÈÔ× Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÓÎ
ÖÛÊ Ö×Å×Ê ÈÔÛÎ ÍÎ× Ì×ÊÙ×ÎÈ ÍÖ ×ÏÌÐÍÃ××É
Ê×ÕÓÉÈ×Ê×Ø ÖÍÊ ÈÔ× Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ é×× wöÍÇÊÈ××Î ïÓÐÅÛÇÑ×× åÍÊÑ×ÊÉ é××Ñ ìÛÊÈÎ×Ê ô×ÛÐÈÔ ùÍÆ×ÊÛÕ×v
ïÓÐÅÛÇÑ×× òÍÇÊÎÛÐ é×ÎÈÓÎ×Ð ø×Ù
óÎ ûÌÊÓÐ
ÚÛÉ×Ø ûÏ×ÊÓÙÛÎ öÛÏÓÐà óÎÉÇÊÛÎÙ× ùÍÏÌÛÎà Ê×ÌÍÊÈ×Ø
ÈÔÛÈ ÈÔ×ÓÊ Ô×ÛÐÈÔÙÛÊ× ÙÍÉÈÉ ÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×Ø Ð×ÉÉ ÈÔÛÎ ÍÎ× Ì×ÊÙ×ÎÈ ÉÓÎÙ× ÈÔ×à Ú×ÕÛÎ ÍÖÖ×ÊÓÎÕ ØÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê
Ô×ÛÐÈÔ Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÓÎ
øÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ìÛÊÈÎ×Ê ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ íÖÖ×Ê×Ø èÔÊÍÇÕÔÍÇÈ åÓÉÙÍÎÉÓÎ
ïÛÎà åÓÉÙÍÎÉÓÎ ÌÇÚÐÓÙ ÛÎØ ÌÊÓÆÛÈ× ×ÏÌÐÍÃ×ÊÉ ÛÊ× ÛÐÊ×ÛØà ÌÊÍÆÓØÓÎÕ ØÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê Ô×ÛÐÈÔ ÙÛÊ× ÙÍÆ×ÊÛÕ× ÈÍ
ÈÔ×ÓÊ ×ÏÌÐÍÃ××É ÷ÄÛÏÌÐ×É ÓÎÙÐÇØ×
éÈÛÈ× ÍÖ åÓÉÙÍÎÉÓÎ íÉÔÑÍÉÔ éÙÔÍÍÐ øÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ
ùÓÈà ÍÖ ûÌÌÐ×ÈÍÎ ïÛÊËÇ×ÈÈ× çÎÓÆ×ÊÉÓÈÃ
ùÓÈà ÍÖ ïÛØÓÉÍÎ ûÐÐÓÛÎÈ ìÊ×ÙÓÉÓÍÎ öÇÂ×
ùÓÈà ÍÖ ïÓÐÅÛÇÑ×× ùÍÏÌÛÎà òÛÎ×ÉÆÓÐÐ×
ïÓÐÅÛÇÑ×× ùÍÇÎÈà ïÓÐÐ×ÊùÍÍÊÉ
ø× ì×Ê× éÙÔÍÍÐ øÓÉÈÊÓÙÈ ñÓÏÚ×ÊÐÃùÐÛÊÑ
ðÛ ùÊÍÉÉ× ùÍÇÎÈà ûÏ×ÊÓÙÛÎ öÛÏÓÐÃ
öÍÊ Û ÖÇÐÐ ÐÓÉÈ ÍÖ åÓÉÙÍÎÉÓÎ ×ÏÌÐÍÃ×ÊÉ ÍÖÖ×ÊÓÎÕ ØÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ÌÛÊÈÎ×Ê Ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ ÆÓÉÓÈ ÔÈÈÌ
ÖÛÓÊÅÓÉÙÍÎÉÓÎÙÍÏ
ÙÍÇÌÐ×É
ÅÓ×ÏÌÐÍÃ×ÊÉ
ûÆÛÓÐÛÚÐ× ÖÊÍÏ ÈÔ× ôÇÏÛÎ êÓÕÔÈÉ ùÛÏÌÛÓÕÎ ÛÈ ÔÈÈÌ
ÅÅÅÔÊÙÍÊÕ
Ê×ÉÍÇÊÙ×É
×ÎÈÊÃ
×ÉÈÛÚÐÓÉÔÓÎÕØÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙÌÛÊÈÎ×ÊÚ×Î×ÖÓÈÉ
wøÍÏ×ÉÈÓÙ ìÛÊÈÎ×Ê ú×Î×ÖÓÈÉ öÛÙÈÉ ÛÎØ úÛÙÑÕÊÍÇÎØv ÷ÏÌÐÍÃ×× ú×Î×ÖÓÈ ê×É×ÛÊÙÔ óÎÉÈÓÈÇÈ× ìÇÚÐÓÙÛÈÓÍÎ ö×ÚÊÇÛÊÃ
ÅÅÅ×ÚÊÓÍÊÕ
ÌØÖ
ÌÇÚÐÓÙÛÈÓÍÎÉ
ÖÛÙÈÉ