SR 04-25-2017 8C
Ci ty Council
Report
City Council Meeting : April 25, 2017
Agenda I tem: 8.C
1 of 12
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Andy Agle, Director , Housing and Economic Development, Housing Division
Subject: Transition of Mountain View Mobile Home Park to Nonprofit Ownership
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Authorize th e City Manager to enter into exclusive negotiations with t he Caritas
Corporation , a California -based non -profit corporation, to transfer ownership of
City -owned Mountain View Mobile Home Park pursuant to Council -approved
parameters ; and
2. Authorize the C ity Manager to negotiate and execute a seventh modification to
Contract #9183 in an amount not to exceed $566,052, including a ten -percent
contingency, with Real Estate Consulting and Services, Inc., a California -based
company, to provide property manageme nt services at Mountain View Mobile
Home Park. The proposed amendment would result in a 99 -month amended
contract with a new total contract amount not to exceed $4,260,939, and would
extend the contract term for an additional twelve months through June 201 8.
Executive Summary
Council directed staff to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to affordable housing
organizations to acquire and operate Mountain View Mobile Home Park (Park) a s long -
term, affordable housing. Three non -profit organizations which own and operate
affordable mobile -home communities submitted proposals in response. Staff engaged a
consultant to assess the financial feasibility of the proposals and capacity of the
proposing organizations. Staff also created a forum for Park residents to me et the three
organizations, hear presentations, ask questions, and provide feedback. A five -member
e valuation c ommittee (Committee) of non -profit and government professionals was
formed to evaluate the proposals, consider Park residents’ comments, review t he
consultant’s assessment, and rate the proposals. The Committee, Housing Commission ,
and staff recommend that the City enter into negotiations with t he Caritas Corporation
(Caritas), a nonprofit affordable housing organization, for transition of the Park .
Staff recommends that t he negotiations be guided by parameters proposed in this report.
Staff would return to Council with negotiated terms for Council consideration and final
approval.
Real Estate Consulting and Services, Inc. (RECS) has provided prope rty management
services at the Park since 2010. Staff recommends extending the contract for an
additional twelve months through June 2018, resulting in a 99 -month total contract term
2 of 12
to provide consistent property management until the Park is transferred. The increase in
contract budget of $566,052 includes management fees, estimated operating expenses
for a twelve -month period, and a standard ten -percent contingency.
Background
The City purchased Mountain View Mobile Home Park (Park) in December 2000. Pr ior
to City ownership, the Park was privately owned by the Ring Trading Corporation
(Ring). In the 1990’s, tenants of the Park and Ring independently filed lawsuits against
the City for alleged damages caused by an adjacent City -owned abandoned landfill. T he
residents' lawsuits against the City were dismissed by the court in December 1998. The
Ring lawsuit against the City was resolved through a Settlement Agreement, which
included the City’s acquisition o f the Park in December 2000. In addition to settling the
lawsuits, the City’s acquisition created opportunities to preserve affordable housing and
develop a plan for needed infrastructure improvements at the Park . The City purchased
the Park using Redevelopment and Tenant Ownership Rights Charter Amendment
funds targeted for affordable housing. As part of the purchase, the Park was deed -
restricted for future occupancy by low - and moderate -income households.
On December 11, 2012 (Attachment A), Council directed staff to explore disposition of
all City -owne d affordable housing properties, including the Park. Council provided the
direction in order to focus on the City’s core affordable housing competencies of
administering rental -assistance programs and creating affordable housing opportunities.
Council reco gnized that affordable housing organizations, rather than the City, possess
core competencies in owning and operating affordable housing. Since the Council
direction, all City -owned affordable housing has been transitioned, except for the Park.
Request f or Proposals Process
At its April 12, 2016 meeting (Attachment B), Council authorized staff to issue an RFP to
affordable housing organizations to acquire and operate the Park as affordable housing.
On May 26, 2016, staff met with Park residents to discuss the RFP process and solicit
feedback regarding desirable qualities of new management, ideas for new amenities,
and preferences regarding RFP review and comment opportunities. On June 9, 2016, a
3 of 12
draft RFP was provided to Park residents, incorporating input from the May meeting
with Park residents and providing Park residents with a two -week comment period,
pursuant to their request. On July 21, 2016 (Attachment C), staff presented the draft
RFP, along with input from Park residents, to the Housing Commissio n (Commission)
for additional public comment. On September 7, 2016, staff returned to residents to
present a revised draft RFP for final comments.
On September 28, 2016, staff issued the RFP. The RFP opportunity was marketed
directly to mobile -home park o wners and operators through industry publications and
trade -association distribution lists , reaching more than 600 members. Additionally, the
RFP was emailed directly to organizations using a staff log of interested parties and
general affordable housing o rganizations. The notice of RFP was also posted in the
Santa Monica Daily Press , on PlanetBids, on City posting sites, and on a City webpage
which was created specifically for the RFP issuance process. Interested parties were
invited to scheduled tours of the Park, and to submit questions during an RFP q uestion
and a nswer period. Nine organizations toured the Park and eleven organizations
submitted a total of 133 questions. On November 10, 2016, staff posted responses to the
questions and provided 13 suppor ting reference documents on the project webpage.
Staff received proposals from three organizations by the December 1, 2016,
submission deadline.
Given the unique (only mobile -home park owned by the City ), and complex (rent -
controlled, deed -restricted, mix of homeowners and renters ) nature of the Park, staff
engaged Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA), a financial/real estate/economics
consultant with deep experience in affordable housing, to assess the financial feasibility
of the proposals and the capac ity of proposing organizations. KMA’s assessment
concluded that all three proposals met financial feasibility and capacity thresholds.
Each submitted proposal is approximately 150 pages. In order to familiarize Park
residents with each proposing organiza tion and associated proposal, staff facilitated
three independent meetings where each organization presented its proposed approach
to owning and operating the Park, and residents were provided a forum to ask questions
4 of 12
regarding the proposal presentations a nd provide oral comments. Residents were also
provided an opportunity to submit written comments regarding each organization and
associated proposal .
A five -member evaluation committee (Committee ) was formed with staff from the Legal
Aid Foundation of Lo s Angeles (nonprofit legal -services organization), Santa Monica
Planning Division (land -use and zoning regulations), Santa Monica Rent Control Agency
(rent -control regulations), and Community Corporation of Santa Monica and Hollywood
Community Housing Corp oration (nonprofit affordable -housing organizations).
Committee members were asked to:
1. Independently review and preliminarily score each proposal based on the RFP
evaluation criteria; and
2. Meet, confer, and provide collective final scores for each pr oposal and a
recommendation based on the RFP evaluation criteria.
The Committee recommended that the City select Caritas as the owner and operator .
On March 30, 2017 (Attachment D), staff presented a recommendation to the Housing
Commission (Commission) to negotiate with Caritas for transfer of the Park.
The Commission supported the recommendation for Caritas, while noting that specific
income -targeting and appropriate funding expenditures should be identified before a
transfer is finalized . The proposal package, including supporting reference documents
and submitted proposals , were included in the March 30 , 2017 staff report to the
Commission.
On -going Property Management
RECS has been providing property management services at the Park since 2010
pursu ant to a Council -authorized contract (see Attachments E, F, G, H, I, and J).
RECS has performed well, demonstrating expertise in property -management services,
familiarity with City rental regulations, and professionalism in their communications with
reside nts. The current RECS contract expires in June 2017, and would need to be
extended through June 2018 while business terms and conditions are negotiated with
the selected proposer and Council consider s final approval .
5 of 12
Discussion
Proposal to Acquire and Ope rate the Park
Each proposing organization demonstrated experience with owning affordable mobile -
home parks. Caritas emerged as the preferred owner and operator with significant
experience and financial capacity , a solid framework for property management, and a
collaborative approach to managing a mobile -home park property with both
homeowners and renters.
Key factors that distinguished Caritas from other proposing organizations include:
1. Experience
a. Caritas owns and operates 20 mobile home parks with a t otal of
3,665 spaces. Comparatively, one of the proposers owns six parks
totaling 925 spaces, and the other proposer owns nine parks totaling
915 spaces.
b. Caritas has a continuous , 20 -year history as a mobile -home park
owner and operator. Comparatively, the other proposers have 19 and
15 years of experience.
c. Caritas has purchased six mobile -home parks from the cities of
Garden Grove and Lancaster, and entered into regulatory agreements
with the cities of Brea, Palmdale, Rohnert Park, San Marcos, Vist a,
and Yucaipa.
d. In 2014, Caritas successfully refinanced six existing mobile home
properties and acquired three new mobile -home properties with $85
million in bond financing.
2. Financial Capacity
Standard & Poor’s Rating Services determined Caritas’ long -term rating to be
stable, and in reviewing a previous Caritas credit profile, provided the
following findings:
a. Caritas’ properties have very strong economic fundamentals and
market dependencies, reflecting excellent demand due to relative
affordabi lity and desirable locations.
b. Caritas demonstrates strong property ownership and management by
an experienced owner and property manager with extensive track
records in the operation and management of mobile home parks.
c. Caritas’ financial strength i s indicated by strong loss -coverage levels
and strong projected debt -service on bonds.
3. Management Plan
a. Caritas affirmatively accepts existing restrictions (Rules & Regulations
Regulatory Agreement, Rent Control Law), and agrees to enter into a
new r egulatory agreement to maintain ongoing affordability.
6 of 12
b. All three proposers agreed to take ownership of the 29 rental homes
currently owned by the City, although one of the three proposers (not
Caritas) expressed some reservations due to concerns regar ding
conflicts when a mobile -home park owner also owns some of the
mobile homes.
c. Caritas proposes a plan for placing manufactured homes on the
currently vacant 13 spaces, and proposes a strategy for resolving the
issues associated with the 11 spaces w hich are compromised by
encroachment from adjacent mobile homes (pursuant to Council action
on April 12, 2016) by approaching existing homeowners with new
home opportunities. Comparatively, the other proposers have not
affirmatively committed to placing ho mes on all vacant and encroached
spaces.
d. Caritas offers a program designed to educate and encourage mobile
home renters to become home owners.
e. Caritas has a comprehensive management agreement with Birtcher
Anderson, a management company with over 40 years of experience,
to manage all mobile home parks owned by Caritas. The structure
provides a strong continuing relationship between the park owner and
the management company, and economies of scale for management
framework and resources.
4. Communit y Engagement
Caritas provided more specific information about its outreach to multi -cultural
and multi -lingual communities, compared to the other two proposers.
Examples of programs include after -school games and activities, summer
reading programs, Englis h as a Second Language classes, exercise classes,
and movie and game nights. Caritas’ community programs encourage and
empower residents to take an active role in collaborating with management to
develop social and educational programs that serve the needs of residents.
Park Resident Feedback
Park residents who attended the proposal presentations and submitted written
comments expressed favorable comments related to all three proposals. Park resident
attendance ranged from 14 to 18 residents per presentati on, and seven to eight written
comments were submitted by residents regarding each proposal. Caritas received
positive comments for its responsiveness to the RFP, approach to management,
community involvement, and experience with owning and operating 20 mo bile -home
parks. The other two proposals received positive comments for responsiveness to the
RFP and for providing handouts at the presentation. Some residents expressed
concerns related to management diversity, out -sourced property management, and
7 of 12
possib le rent increases as sociated with the present ations of the other two proposers.
At the March 30, 2017 Commission meeting, three out of four Park residents in
attendance affirmatively expressed support for the recommendation to select Caritas
and proceed with negotiations. One Park resident in attendance spoke favorably of
RECS’ and staff’s dedication to the Park, but did not address the staff recommendation
regarding the transfer of Park ownership.
Financial Feasibility
All three proposers identified the existing Park structure as financially infeasible due
to a combination of challenges: low rents, minimal allowable annual rent increases,
significant vacancies (several due to lot encroachments), and the high cost of property
management due to the 29 City -owned rental homes. As a result, each proposal
contemplates various forms of financial assistance from the City to ensure long -term
financial viability. The primary variables that impact the financial assistance
associated with long -term viability include :
1. Minimal rent increases subject to the Rent Control Board annual general
adjustment.
Vacancy de -control is not applicable to mobile home parks, therefore rents
cannot be increased to market rate after a vacancy. Maximum annual rent
increases at the Park are limited to the Rent Control Board annual general
adjustment, which has averaged one percent per year over the past five years.
The financial viability of the Park will be stressed if operating expenses outpace
rental revenue increases.
2. Property tax burden once the Park transitions to private ownership.
Under City ownership, the Park is exempt from property taxes. Upon transfer, the
Park owner w ould receive property tax abatement only for spaces occupied by
tenants certified as low -income households. Obtaining appropriate household
income documentation will be crucial to achieving the necessary tax exemption
and maintaining the financial viability of the Park.
3. Placing new homes on vacant spaces to stabilize Park revenue, including
resolving use of vacant spaces containing existing encroachments.
The net annual loss for the Park between fiscal years 2013 -14 and 2015 -16
8 of 12
average d $92,0 00 . The Park is currently generating revenue from 81 out of the
available 105 spaces due to vacancies. Of the 24 vacan t spaces, 13 spaces are
available for immediate use. The maximum allowable space rent in the Park is
currently $378 per month. Leasing the 13 spaces, projected within two years of
transfer, w ould generate approximately $59,000 in additional annual revenue ,
leaving a continued operating gap .
Resolving the issues associated with the 11 spaces compromised by
encroachment from adjacent mobile homes would further enhance operating
revenue, strengthening the financial viability of the Park.
4. City’s commitment to fund reserve accounts.
The Park is currently not generating sufficient revenue to cover operating
expenses and may need a one -time capitalized operating reserve at transition
to fortify the Park’s financial capacity until vacant and encumbered spaces a re
occupied with new homes over time.
5. Capital improvements
Park residents have expressed an interest in improvements to the community
building for gatherings and community -building activities. Funding for upgrades
to the community building would also e nhance the marketability of vacant
spaces.
In 2009, the City completed a $5 million infrastructure project to underground
electrical, telephone, and cable television lines; improve natural gas, potable
water, sanitary sewer , and street -lighting system s; a nd upgrade curb, gutter,
and roadway pavement surfaces. The City recently completed an expansion of
the pool deck, replacement of the pool fence, and installation of a pool lift for
persons living with disabilities.
6. Restricted household income level of future households.
All three proposals model Park occupancy assuming home ownership on the
existing vacant spaces. Whether the new tenants can afford to purchase and
install new manufactured homes depends on the desired target population for the
vacant sp aces. New manufactured homes are estimated to range in cost from
$55,000 to $75,000. A h ousehold with incomes at the lowest end of the spectrum
would need a 100 percent subsidy to purchase a new manufactured home, while
a very low -income household would ne ed the majority of the cost subsidized. A
l ow - or moderate -income household would likely not need a subsidy to purchase
a new manufactured home.
7. City’s commitment to fund a homeowner program for existing renters of City -
owned manufactured homes. None o f the proposals project long -term viability
without programs to help renters become owners.
9 of 12
As owner of the 29 rental homes, the City is currently responsible for expenses
related to regular maintenance and repairs of the homes. Furthermore, t he
financial burden of upkeep compounds as the homes age and would continue to
strain the Park’s financial viability. Th ese factor s result in atypical operating
expenses for the Park when compared with tradition mobile -home parks
occupied entirely by homeowners, who ar e responsible for the maintenance
and repairs of their homes.
Negotiating Parameters
The Park must maintain long -term financial viability, provide quality property
management and resident engagement, sustain affordable rents pursuant to housing
covenants and the Rent Control Law, and minimize the investment of limited housing
funds. As a result, staff recommends that the Council adopt parameters to guide the
negotiations with a selected proposer. Recommended parameters for the disposition
agreements inclu de:
1. Develop a long -term financial operating plan that reflects the housing -
affordability covenants and rent -control restrictions associated with the property
and ensure sufficient annual budgets to support quality property management
and resident services, while minimizing housing -trust -fund assistance that is
necessary to support long -term viability;
2. For City financial assistance that is required, direct resources toward capital
replacement and operating funds at transition, rather than on -going assist ance;
3. Include a detailed strategy to encourage mobile -home renters to become
owners, including financial impacts associated with the strategy;
4. Include a plan with financial contingencies for renters who choose not to
become owners;
5. Include a co st -effective plan to finance common -area improvements (e.g.,
clubhouse, lighting, fencing) over the short -term and long -term, including
incorporation of the City’s sustainability initiatives;
6. Include a plan for occupancy of vacant spaces that respects the City’s policy
for addressing vacancies (i.e. existing residents may maintain encroachments
until they leave voluntarily or otherwise give up the encroachment voluntarily )
while incorporating the City’s sustainability initiatives;
7. Include a plan for new occupancy of vacant spaces to incorporate a mix of
affordability levels;
8. Include a provision to ensure that the City’s long -term interests are maintained,
such as a City option to repurchase the property at the end of the affordability
covenant t erm.
9. Include a plan for addressing property -tax expenses, including obtaining
income -qualification information from existing residents, as well as funding
10 of 12
property taxes in cases where income qualifications cannot be met.
On -going Property Management
The scope of property management duties that RECS currently performs covers all
necessary routine functions, including: handling day -to -day operations; supervision and
coordination of maintenance and repair contracts; payment of all operating expenses
such as utilities, maintenance, repairs and fees; occupancy responsibilities, including
leasing and rent collection. City’s Housing staff provides direct oversight of RECS to
ensure effective and efficient management, including conferring with RECS weekly and
reviewing monthly status reports.
In December 2016, staff recommended a six -month extension of the RECS contract in
anticipation of transferring the Park by June 2017. The proposals received in response
to the RFP, and recommendation from the Committee an d Commission , show that
transferring the Park in a manner that meets the City’s expectations w ould require
significant negotiations, development of detailed long -term plans, and final Council
approval. Therefore, staff recommends extending the existing pro perty management
contract with RECS for an additional twelve months through June 2018, to ensure
continued management until proposed deal terms can be approved by Council and the
transfer completed. The current contract expires on June 30, 2017.
Alternat ive
Council could select a transferee and authorize the City Manager to negotiate and
execute final transfer documents pursuant to Council -adopted parameters. However,
the opportunity for public review and Council approval of specific terms such as
afford ability levels and total city investment would be missed. Council could also reject
all proposals and direct staff to conduct a new RFP process, which staff does not
believe would result in different outcomes. Finally, Council could reject all proposals
and maintain City ownership of the Park. Such an approach would distract the City
from its core affordable -housing competencies of operating rental -assistance programs
and supporting the production and preservation of affordable housing.
11 of 12
Next Steps
With Council direction, staff would proceed to negotiate with Caritas pursuant to the
parameters described in this report, and return to Council with deal terms for Council
consideration.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Proposal to Acquire and Operate t he Park
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the
recommended action authorizing the City Manager to negotiate the transfer of the Park
to Caritas. Staff w ould return to Council for consideration of deal terms for transitioning
Park ownership to Caritas and w ould present specific financial impacts and required
budget actions at that time.
On -going Property Management
The contract modification to be awarded to RECS is $566,052, for an amended contract
total not to exceed $4,260,939. Funds are available in the FY 2016 -17 budget in the
Housing and Economic Development Department. The contract would be charged to
account 01264.533220 . Future -year funding is contingent on Council budget approval.
Prepared By: Ava Lee , Senior Development Analyst
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Council Staff Report - December 11, 2012
B. City Staff Report April 12, 2016
12 of 12
C. Housing Commission Staff Report - July 21, 2016
D. Housing Commission Staff Report - March 30, 2017
E. Council Staff Report - March 9, 2010
F. Council Staff Report - September 13 , 2011
G. Council Staff Report - June 11, 2013
H. Council Staff Re port - April 28, 2015
I. Council Staff Report - March 1, 2016
J. Council Staff Report - December 6, 2016
K. Written Comments
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Mary Vincent <mary.vincent.mav@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, April 24, 2017 7:02 PM
To:councilmtgitems; Clerk Mailbox
Subject:Agenda Item 8-C City Council meeting 4/25/2017
Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Dear City Mayor and Council Memb ers,
Re: Agenda Item 8-C Transition of MVMHP to non-profit ownership
We support Caritas Corporation (a non-profit organization) as the new owner for MVMHP.
We are against arbitrarily extending th e contract with Real Estate Consu lting and Services, Inc (RECS) property
management company for one year. Instead, we support giving Caritas Corp. authority, effective immediately
upon completion of the sale, to determine the process of transition from RECS to their existing mobile home
management team, Birtcher Anderson. We presume th ere will be many benefits and efficiencies from running
Caritas Corp.'s various mobile home parks under one mana gement team, that will result in significant cost
savings as well.
We are in support of expediting the sale of MVMHP to Caritas, and keeping any need for extending RECS
contract to a minimum.
The Vincent Family--Mountain View Mob ile Home Park residents (Space X4)
Item 8-C
4/25/17
1 of 4
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Cris Mac <crismac11111@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 25, 2017 10:02 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Clerk Mailbox
Cc:cristopher; mvmira_inc@hotmail.com; ken_ward@email.com; Belinda Van Sickle; P-N-
A-Board@yahoogroups.com; Mary Marlow
Subject:Agenda Item 8-C Transition of MVMHP to non-profit ownership,
Dear City Mayor and honorable Council members,
Tonight’s Agenda Item 8 ‐C Transition of MVMHP to non ‐profit ownership.
Whilst I support Caritas Corporation (a non ‐profit organization) as the new owner for MVMHP ‐‐ spending half a Million
Dollars on an incompetent REC’S management company I do not support.
The staff report recom mends extending Real Estate Consulting Services inc for a further 12 month period. Whilst I don’t
believe this will happen ‐‐ $500,000 plus is a glaring misuse of public funds and a give away of funds when little to no
work is done in exchange.
It would behoove everyone if we stop for a momen t to consider who REC’S is.
Since the City entered into contract #9183 with REC’S, they have been sold 3 times and are in their third ownership,
3.394,887:00 Million Dollars and 7 years later the park is in worse condition than before REC’S was hired (this would
excl ude recent work on the pool area which took the City 17 years to finally initiate/complete).
In light of the Elizabeth Riel debacle and the give away of
$1,000,000:00 by then Mayor Pam O’Connor’s actions/influence on EX City Manager Rod Gould and the deliberate
removal of evidence by staff at City Hall, one must co nsider that money Laundering is occurring through large sums of
public monies paid for little or no work ie new City manager Rick Cole has signed staffs report recommending REC’S
contract be extended for 12 months, 10% of the half million dollars is
$50,000:00 split 5 ways wou ld make 5 members of staff/city council or john/jane does very happy as cleaned cash is king
and difficult to follow etc.
I am against arbitrarily extending the contract with Real Estate Consulting and Services, Inc. (RECS) property
Management Company for one year. Instead, I support giving Caritas Corp. authority, effective immediatel y upon
completion of the sale, to determine the process of transition from RECS to their existing mobile home management
team, Birtcher Anderson.
We are in support of expediting the sale of MVMHP to Caritas, and keeping any need for extending RECS contract to a
minimum.
Yours Sin cerely:
Item 8-C
4/25/17
2 of 4
2
Cris Mcleod Pico Neighborhood Association Chair/MVMIRA INC Secretary Cris McLeod, 1930 Stewart St. #60A
Item 8-C
4/25/17
3 of 4
1
Vernice Hankins
From:mickey475@juno.com
Sent:Tuesday, April 25, 2017 12:09 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:4/25 council item 8C
RE: Agenda item 8-c Transition of Mobile Home Park to new owner
I support the transition of Caritas Non-Profit Corpor ation as the new owner of the Mobile
View Mobile Home Park.
I do not support the one year extension of the RECS contract for 566,052.
I believe the new owner should have the right to bring in their own management company, this
would be a savings to the City of $500,000 plus and could be used to purchase new homes and
fill all vacant spaces. Any transition should not ta ke one year. I find this one year extension to
be arbitrary and without basis. RECS is lavishly paid at ½ million a y ear – yet the maintenance
done is at a minimum. The rules are not uniformly enforced as the manager is conflicted by her
duties versus sitting in a locked office all day.
I currently live at the Mobile Home Pa rk and have been a tenant since 1984.
____________________________________________________________
3 Life-Shortening Foods You Should Avoid
3 Harmful Foods
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TG L3132/58ff9edadb 6a41eda7788st04vuc
Right-click download help protec Outlook pr automatic d this picture Internet.Sponsored
Item 8-C
4/25/17
4 of 4
REFERENCE:
Modified Contract
No. 9183