INTERSECT
Newsletter of the Washington Regional Network For Livable
Communities
Volume 8 Number 1
February 17, 2004
Support Intersect, join WRN!
Summary:
Summary:
* March 9 forum on Good Neighbors: New Development
in Older Neighborhoods
* Design Matters Forum Series Addresses Livability
* Zimmerman Honored with Livable Communities Leadership
Award, 2/23
* Metro Fare Hikes and Service Cuts Loom as Maryland
Weakens Support
* Price Explains D.C. Mayor's Affordable Housing
Policies
* D.C. Housing Advocates Launch "Friend of the
Fund" Campaign to Secure Promised Money for Affordable Housing
* Matching Land Use Patterns and Transit Investments:
A Primer for the Washington Region
* Virginia Conservation Network Weighs In on Gas Tax
Legislation
* Federal Court Rules in Favor of Environmentalists
on D.C. Area Smog Lawsuit
* Events and Thank You's
Good Neighbors: New Development
in Older Neighborhoods
with
Roger Lewis, architect, professor, Washington
Post columnist
John Torti, architect, Torti Gallas and
Partners, and
Toby Millman, Eakin/Youngentob Associates
Tuesday, March 9
6 pm, refreshments; 6:30 pm, program
National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC)
401 9th St., NW, North Lobby, suite 500
Neighbors often cite out-of-character buildings
and traffic congestion when objecting to new development. Leading developers
and designers show how they have addressed residents' concerns and have
made new development fit in and enhance existing communities.
This is the first in WRN's series "Design
Matters."
RSVP: WRN, 202-667-5445 or e-mail staff@washingtonregion.net. This event
is free. Please arrive before 7 pm. Gallery Place, Metro Center, Archives,
Federal Triangle Metro stations
***************************************************************************************
Design Matters Forum
Series Addresses Livability
WRN's spring forum series, "Design Matters:
Building Livability" will look at design, planning, and transportation
engineering solutions that create livable neighborhoods. Despite renewed
interest in urban locations, many design and marketing strategies remain
automobile-oriented and suburban. Transit-Oriented Development is much
more than building close to Metro stations. WRN's series will explore
what it takes to create a sense of place and community.
The five-session will open on March 9 with a
discussion of the challenges facing infill development - how to fit
in and whether just fitting in is enough (see article this issue). Subsequent
sessions will address new approaches to zoning, retail development,
streets, and traffic. Our purpose is to inform activists, decision-makers,
and business leaders about state-of-the-art practices for accommodating
regional growth and creating diverse, livable communities.
Following the "Good Neighbors" program
in March, WRN will host "Way Beyond Zoning: Form-based Codes shape
Livable Streets" with Geoffrey Ferrell and Tim Lynch, April 13;
"Real Streets: New Approaches to Transportation" with Dan
Burden, May 18; "Smart Growth Recognition Awards: Business and
Environmentalists Agree on Smart Growth Projects"; and "Mallternatives:
Transit-Oriented Retail". See more at: www.washingtonregion.net
********************************************************************************************
Chris Zimmerman Honored with Livable
Communities Leadership Award
Reception: Monday, February 23
5:30 - 7 p.m.
Mimi's American Bistro, 2200 P St., NW
(2 blocks west of Dupont Circle Metro)
Suggested donation: $75/person/ $125 couple; reception with appetizers
and beverages
WRN will honor Christopher Zimmerman, a member
of the Arlington County Board, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit
Authority, and the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board
with its Livable Communities Leadership Award 2004. Zimmerman is being
honored for his outstanding leadership in helping to create more livable
communities for the Washington region.
Major sponsors for this event are Stout &
Teague, Eakin/Youngentob Associates, New Legacy Partners, LCOR, Torti
Gallas & partners CHK Inc., Potomac Investment Properties. Special
thanks to Metropolis Development, CIG International, Russell Katz, David
W. Briggs and Mimi's American Bistro.
*************************************************************************************
Metro Fare Hikes and Service
Cuts Loom as Maryland Weakens Support
By Cheryl Cort
Faced with another operating deficit, Metro is
considering a set of fare increases and service cuts that will be widely
felt among the region's transit riders, and the region as a whole. While
budgets are tight among all three-member jurisdictions, Maryland is
alone in offering a lower increase in public support for the region's
transit agency.
At the February 12 Metro Budget Committee meeting,
Virginia and D.C. Metro board members reiterated their commitment to
fund the transit agency at an increased level of 4.5 percent to help
make up the budget shortfall that would leave a $28.8 million gap. Maryland,
however, is pushing for a lower subsidy increase, which will generate
a larger deficit of $36.3 million to be made up with fare increases
and service cuts.
One option the Metro staff proposed was to increase
fares with a market approach that would only increase fares on users
most willing to accept higher charges, losing the least amount of ridership
and revenue. Staff recommended focusing on peak period rail commuters,
and proposed to raise peak boarding charges between 15-30 cents. For
off peak rail trips, staff proposed only a 5-cent increase and also
only a 5-cent hike for all bus trips. Most Metro board members voiced
disagreement with maintaining a low increase for bus riders and asked
for staff to present a higher bus fare proposal. Arlington County board
member Chris Zimmerman argued against raising bus fares at the same
level as Metrorail noting that the quality of service and amenities
is much lower for bus service, and that the bus serves a less affluent
ridership. A number of service cuts were considered and rejected by
the board, including closing four stations on the weekends (Cheverly,
Capital Heights, Forest Glen and Federal Center), and several station
entrances that attract few riders on the weekend. Next week the Metro
board will decide on the final package of service cuts and fare increases
for public hearings.
D.C. and Virginia board members view the $28.8
million deficit as much more manageable amount than the $36.3 million
that Maryland's position is pushing the deficit towards. The difference
in the shortfall will be made up in higher fare increases and deeper
cuts in service.
************************************************************************************************
Eric Price Explains D.C.
Mayor's Affordable Housing Policies
By Cheryl Cort & Janet W. Brown
Eric Price, the top adviser on economic development
to D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams, said at a WRN forum that bringing private
development to the city makes it possible to fund affordable housing
and other services to the public.
Price, speaking to a standing-room only crowd
at the Jan. 14 forum on affordable housing policies, also said that
mixed-income housing is the only way to appropriately provide affordable
housing for low- and moderate-income residents; that corridors along
good public transportation routes must receive more intensive development
in order to pay for improvements in less affluent parts of the city;
and that he is skeptical about the contribution that inclusionary zoning,
commercial linkage and rent control make to the city's supply of affordable
housing.
According to Price, when the Mayor invited him
to join his administration to create a housing program, he found an
array of scattered initiatives that failed to yield results. Price also
found that no private developers were building affordable housing. When
Price took over, he created one housing project pipeline out of many
that contained thousands of languishing project, and pushed to close
project deals within the first year. Since 1999, the Williams Administration
has financed over 11,000 units of affordable housing, including the
rehabilitation of existing units and the production of new units, as
well as generated additional federal funding.
According to Price, D.C. is disadvantaged from
gaining as much from federal funding because it is not a state. Price
said that more federal money can be gained by creating a regional housing
authority, where D.C. can obtain an increased share of federal funding
by counting the region's population base. D.C. has 10,000 public housing
units, and 10,000 subsidized units amounting to 10 percent of the city's
housing stock, according to Price. This makes up almost half of the
region's federally assisted housing.
Price explained that an early Administration
effort to leverage city resources to create affordable housing emerged
with the sale for $100 million of the Pennsylvania Avenue property for
the Newseum. Another $25 million was put into the Housing Production
Trust Fund as part of the deal. The Trust Fund was created in 1989 but
never funded, he noted.
Price said that the city made the inclusion of
affordable housing routine for disposition of public land by requiring
affordable housing. Redevelopment initiatives by the city or its land
agency, National Capital Revitalization Corporation (NCRC), such as
multiple parcels in Columbia Heights, the Southwest Waterfront Plan,
and the Wax Museum site at 5th and K streets, NW, all require 20 percent
affordable housing for moderate and low income families.
Price stated unequivocally that he is convinced
that mixed-income housing is the only way to appropriately provide affordable
housing for needy residents. He cited innovations in the city's many
HOPE VI projects which attract federal funding by replacing "severely
distressed" public housing with mixed income housing. Price said
that the commercial development as a part of the Arthur Capper HOPE
VI project enabled the city to replace all the public units along with
creating market rate units. "Economic development helps the affordability,"
he said. When questioned about HOPE VI in general, Price solemnly acknowledged
that "loss of public housing units is a problem." He indicated
that the city is advancing a new HOPE VI deal on a parcel that has been
vacant for many years.
When questioned, Price said that the greatest
challenge facing D.C. is the expiration of Section 8 contracts that
provide low-income residents with housing through federal subsidies
paid to landlords. He said that the market is pressuring gentrifying
neighborhood where many Section 8 properties exist. He said that the
city has made an effort to renew contracts to keep these units affordable.
He cited a large building in Columbia Heights, which maintained the
affordable units with $40 million in city subsidies. He expressed concern
that this was a huge sum, suggesting that such expenditures limit the
amount of aid the city can provide to other housing needs.
Price was repeatedly questioned about the loophole
in the tenants right of first refusal which allows landlords to sell
a rental property over two years in order to avoid tenants right to
purchase. He appeared unfamiliar with the number of properties thus
transferred in the past two years and with the DCRA's facilitation of
that process. He did however, acknowledge that this was a problem.
*************************************************************************************
D.C. Housing Advocates Launch
"Friend of the Fund" Campaign to Secure Promised Money for
Affordable Housing
The D.C. Affordable Housing Alliance launched
a "Friend of the Fund" campaign to get D.C. Council and Mayor
Williams to make good on their promise of dedicated revenues for the
Housing Production Trust Fund. The Affordable Housing Alliance, a broad
coalition of housing activists including WRN, launched the campaign
to demonstrate wide public support for reliable funding for affordable
housing. The Alliance believes that the city will continue to cut its
investment in the Trust Fund, as it has attempted or succeeded to do
every previous year, unless strong community support is expressed. Under
the 2002 Housing Act, the Housing Production Trust Fund was to receive
15 percent of the transfer and recordation taxes collected from real
estate transactions. Each year, the Mayor has cut or proposed to cut
the amount of funding due to the trust fund. Last year, D.C. Council
acted to restore the full amount of 21.5 million over the Mayor's effort
to reduce funding by half. The first year that the Trust Fund was funded,
it was supposed to receive $22 million, but the Mayor and Council reduced
the appropriate to $5 million. To learn more about "Friend of the
Fund" see: http://www.cnhed.org
***************************************************************************************
Matching
Land Use Patterns and Transit Investments:
A Primer for the Washington Region
By Christopher Forinash, WRN Board member & transportation analyst
A livable community includes a range of job and
housing choices for its residents, along with recreational, educational,
commercial and other services. In a livable community, these activities
are arranged so that residents can reach many of them within their neighborhood
or the nearby larger community, by an easy walk or bike ride. A livable
region consists of many such communities, connected by high-quality
transit service as well as streets and bike routes. A livable region
supports healthy citizens, a healthy economy, and a healthy environment.
In the Washington region today, we are poised
to increase our commitment to livable communities and the high-quality
transportation network to connect them. By pursuing smart growth policies,
most jurisdictions (to some degree) have begun to heed the call of their
citizens to provide more choices of high-quality places to live. More
and more residents, business owners, developers and public officials
recognize that mixed-use, compact, walkable communities represent a
fiscally conservative and sustainable strategy that accommodates current
and future lifestyle demands.
Several significant expansions of transit service
have been proposed in the region. The breadth and variety of vehicle
types, rights-of-way, and stations is enough to confuse even transit
professionals. Add in the variety of community types they are intended
to serve and parts of the region where they're proposed, and our ability
to keep track of "what's happening where" fails. We hear about
light rail, urban rail, heavy rail, Metrorail, commuter rail, Metrobus,
commuter bus, community bus, bus rapid transit, intermodal transfer
facilities, and more. How do we make sense of it all? What can we support
as advocates for livable communities in a smart growth region?
Transit and urban form: In the beginning there
was the strong-downtown city. When downtown Washington was the single
job center of the region, supported by pedestrian-scale neighborhoods
and streetcar suburbs, the solutions seemed easy. If your trip is too
far, you take the streetcar. As our region's jobs and housing decentralized,
that simple model fell apart. We adopted development forms that, far
from being supportable by any transit service, were hostile to any travel
not involving a personal vehicle. In general, development that is single-use
and low-density spreads out our activities so much that no transit can
efficiently serve us. To add to the challenge, such areas (despite their
low density) have not in many places been successfully retrofitted with
mixed uses and higher densities. Arlington's Rosslyn-Ballston corridor
provides one model of how to accomplish that transition successfully.
Tysons Corner provides another model of how to develop densely, but
the resulting congestion shows that with little residential use and
no pedestrian orientation, density results in inefficient and unloved
"communities".
What type of land use patterns can transit most
efficiently serve? The specific answer depends on the type of transit,
but in general, transit-friendly communities are characterized by a
set of factors. First, they are at least relatively dense and compact.
This results in many potential transit riders being within a reasonable
walk, bicycle or shuttle-bus distance of the transit service. Second,
they include a mix of uses, so that stations receive a balance of trips
over the course of the day and in all directions of travel. Third, they
create a high-quality pedestrian environment. Generous sidewalks, interesting
streetscape and activities, good lighting, street trees and parks form
a safe and attractive way to get to and from transit and other daily
activities.
Metrorail / urban rail / heavy rail: Our Metrorail
system serves well areas already developed with high densities, mixed
uses, and pedestrian-friendly design. Examples include many downtown
Washington stations, such as Dupont Circle. In cases such as Arlington's,
such service is warranted where strong smart growth plans have been
developed. In other regions lacking strong, center-focused and mixed-use
development, or lacking a network of integrated transit services, heavy
rail provides fewer benefits - see Atlanta and Baltimore for examples.
Heavy rail is the most expensive to construct
of the transit investments. While the amount of expensive right-of-way
required is limited, since much of the way is either in tunnel or on
bridge, those grade-separated tracks are quite expensive. Because of
the cost and operational characteristics of heavy rail, stations generally
should not be spaced less than 3/4-1 mile apart. This distant station-spacing
generally best supports nodes of highest-intensity, mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented
development, rather than continuous corridors or fabrics of development.
In outlying parts of our region, stations are
spaced much further apart, and to avoid land costs the lines and stations
use freeway or existing railroad land. With much of the pedestrian access
area wasted on freeway, parking lots, or rail yards, the amount of development
that can be accommodated is significantly hampered.
What kinds of Metrorail extensions make the most
sense? Given the above, Metrorail additions could include infill stations,
further circulation within core (although this parallel capacity could
also use other technologies like light rail), connections between radials
(though other technologies apply here too), double-tracking and other
capacity increases, and some modest extensions to areas planned for
intensive smart growth (transit-oriented) development.
Light rail / streetcar / trolley: These types
of rail transit travel mostly at-grade (not in tunnels or on bridges),
and in some instances travel within the street sharing right-of-way
with vehicles. Light rail generally refers to the generation of trains
(including Baltimore and San Diego) operating mostly in dedicated rights-of-way,
while streetcars and trolleys use smaller rail vehicles generally using
the same streets as vehicles. With the resulting lower cost, at-grade
environment, and also lower travel speeds, these types of transit fit
well with closer station spacing. As a result, they work well in a corridor
or fabric of mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods and communities.
Commuter rail (and bus): Commuter rail lines can be thought of as the
"freeways" of transit service. These services are almost always
oriented toward commuter traffic only (as the name implies). Combined
with the radial nature of the lines, the resulting communities may be
transit-oriented but the transit service is not rich enough for residents
or workers to orient their other activities around it. Think of the
classic old suburban towns, many of which grew up around a rail station.
Commuter rail can help to anchor towns with some transit-orientation,
but is best suited for towns and other livable communities disconnected
from the rest of the region by distance or geographical barriers. In
many cases, commuter rail can have the same sprawl-inducing effects
as freeways, especially when the rail stations are surrounded by seas
of commuter parking.
Bus Rapid Transit: The term Bus Rapid Transit
(BRT) generally represents a range of improved bus services, ranging
from express buses operating in general traffic, to rail-like system
with stations, exclusive rights-of-way, and enhanced vehicles. At the
former, lowest cost extreme, BRT is essentially the same as regular
bus or express or commuter bus. At the latter extreme, the costs of
BRT are similar to those of rail, and the impacts on communities are
as well. Two significant differences between BRT and rail remain. First,
the buses are able to leave the dedicated travelway and continue as
feeder service through neighborhoods and to other destinations. This
reduces the need to transfer and can provide better service. Second,
BRT can provide a way to improve transit service in the shorter term,
building market share and proving the need for further investment. In
other words, BRT can serve as a bridge between current low-quality development
and transit service and future smart growth and improved transit. That
said, BRT should not be viewed solely as a transition. Well-designed
and developed BRT serves as the anchor to the livable city of Curitiba,
Brazil, and many US cities are moving toward implementing this improved
type of transit.
Communities must establish a vision and plan
for their future land use before fixing on a particular type of transit
to implement. Smart growth land use patterns and transit investments
are much more mutually supportive than sprawl and transit. Appropriate
transit depends on the compactness, mix of uses, and pedestrian friendliness
of a neighborhood, and its proximity to similar development. Mismatching
transit and communities, usually by planning a costly rail line without
supporting walkable land uses, wastes resources and poorly serves transit
riders. In a diverse region like Washington, many different types of
transit service will be required to ensure the mobility, choice and
economic vitality for all residents and businesses. Future parts of
this series will explore specific corridors and subregions within the
Washington region, and discuss which transit investments fit where.
**********************************************************************************
Virginia Conservation
Network Weighs In on Gas Tax Legislation
By Lyn Stoesen
The Virginia Conservation Network (VCN), in coalition
with six other organizations, has asked the Virginia House of Delegates
to consider the underlying causes of the state's transportation challenges
before approving legislation to increase the state gasoline tax to meet
transportation funding shortfalls.
"Sprawl is causing the amount of driving
to increase faster than the rate of our population growth. At the same
time, increasing evidence indicates that new and wider highways generate
significant new traffic without providing long-term congestion relief
since they cause development to spread out and the amount of driving
to increase," VCN Executive Director David J. Kovacs wrote in a
letter to Virginia House Finance Committee Chair Harry J. Parrish (R-Manassas).
Kovacs noted VCN's position that 50 percent of
any new funding should go to transit, pedestrian and bicycle transportation.
He also elaborated on four actions the organization advocates for to
improve transportation in Virginia: tie state transportation funding
to measurable performance criteria including reduction in mileage driven
per person; partner with local governments to adopt smarter growth laws
and policies; use resources more efficiently by spending first on repairing
the existing transportation system; and shift funding to public transit,
freight rail, walking, and bicycling.
*********************************************************************************************
Federal Court Rules in Favor of
Environmentalists on D.C. Area Smog Lawsuit
By Lyn Stoesen
A federal appeals court on Feb. 3 ruled that
the Environmental Protection Agency violated the Clean Air Act when
it approved regional smog control plans that allowed extensions beyond
a 1999 deadline to meet established standards.
A lawsuit filed by Earthjustice on behalf of
the Sierra Club challenged the EPA's "conditional" approval
of Washington, D.C.-area plan that allowed for meeting the standards
in the future on the grounds that it was illegally ignoring the Clean
Air Act deadlines. It was the third federal court victory for the Sierra
Club on the ozone issue in the Washington area.
"This is a big victory for everyone who
breathes the air in this community," said Earthjustice attorney
David Baron, according to a news release. "Just by being outside,
Washington area residents are exposed to ozone at levels that can cause
serious health problems, especially for children, senior citizens, and
asthmatics."
According to Earthjustice, in 2003 the EPA "conditionally"
approved regional air pollution plans that a federal Court had ruled
inadequate in 2002. "The plans were completely missing a variety
of anti-smog measures required by the Clean Air Act, including stronger
pollution limits for factories, annual emissions cuts, and steps to
offset growth in car and truck exhaust."
***********************************************************************************
Events
February 2004, Eight Neighborhood Summits
Planned to Present DC's Long-Range Vision to Citizens. See http://planning.dc.gov/planning/cwp/view.asp?a=1283&q=594758&planningNav_GID
or call Jill Diskan at (202) 442-8708.
Thursday, February 19, 12:30-1:30pm. Building
the 21st Century: Sustainable Design and Energy-Efficient Building Techniques
for Existing Housing. William Asdal, president of Asdal and Company
Builders. Free. National Building Museum, 401 F Street NW.
Monday, February 23, 5:30-7 pm. WRN Livable
Communities Leadership Award reception for honoree Chris Zimmerman.
Suggested donation: $75, at Mimi's Bistro 2200 P Street.
Wednesday, February 25, 1:00-4:00 p.m. Green
Roofs and Community Greens. Guest speakers Katrin Scholz-Barth,
and Kate Herrod, Director of Community Greens of Arlington, VA. Lee
Memorial Recreation Center, 1108 Jefferson St, Alexandria, Virginia.
RSVP Brian LeCouteur: blecouteur@mwcog.org, or Glenn_Eugster@nps.gov
or call COG (202) 962-3393 or NPS (202) 619-7492.
March 3-5, 2004. 2004 National Bike Summit.
Join bicycle advocates, industry leaders, transportation professionals,
key legislators and government officials for the National Bike Summit
convened by the League of American Bicyclists in Washington, D.C. See:
http://www.bikeleague.org/events/natlsummitmarch2004.htm
Tuesday, March 9, 6pm. Good Neighbors: New
Development in Older Neighborhoods. WRN forum with Roger Lewis,
John Torti, Toby Millman. 401 9th Street, NW, North Lobby, Suite 500.
Metro Center, Archives.
Monday, March 15, 5pm. Smart Growth Recognition
Program Application due. The SGA is currently accepting private
sector smart growth project proposals that are currently or soon will
be under review by local government regulatory agencies. See http://washington.uli.org/sga
or contact John Bailey, sga@uli.org, 202-624-7003.
Tuesday, April 13. 6pm. Way Beyond Zoning:
Form-Based Codes Shape Livable Streets. Geoffrey Ferrell, leading
form-based codes planner; and Tim Lynch, Columbia Pike Revitalization,
will discuss how form-based codes differ from conventional zoning and
how it can be applied throughout the region. A WRN forum. 401 9th Street,
NW, North Lobby, Suite 500.
May 6-8. National Congress of Pedestrian Advocates
2004 "Walking: Everybody's Business -- Revitalizing people and
places." Advocates, practitioners, and public officials gather
to continue efforts to make America walkable and get Americans walking.
The Hilton, Silver Spring, Maryland. For more see: http://americawalks.org
Thank You's: WRN wishes to thank the following friends of WRN
for their generous contributions: Andy Fellows, Jennifer VanDriesen,
Jim Sebastian, Marilyn Klein, Harry Sanders, Allen Greenberg, David
Schwartzman, Carol Weisner, William Gallagher, David Freed, Harriet
Tregoning, Piedmont Environmental Council, Allen Muchnick, Steve Jones,
Kathryn Stratos, Kathleen Courrier, Marilyn Hoskins, David Carlson,
Dulles Corridor Rail Association, Gerald Allan Schwinn, Tim Torma and
Jon Morgan.
Intersect staff: Cheryl Cort, editor; Christopher Forinash, Lyn Stoesen,
Janet W. Brown, Elizabeth Cox contributing writers.
______________________________________________________________________________________
WRN advocates transportation
investments, land use policies, and community designs that enhance existing
communities and the environment of the Washington, D.C. Metro Region.
Comments
and articles welcome.
Washington
Regional Network For Livable Communities
1777
Church Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 667-5445 Fax: (202) 667-4491
Email: staff@washingtonregion.net
Web:
http://www.washingtonregion.net
WRN Contribution Form
___
*** Add $20/person for Intersect to be faxed long-distance or mailed
(to cover costs).
Individual
Contribution Categories:
___
Limited Income $15
___
Basic Individual $35*
___
Supporter $80*
___
Sustainer $120
Organizational
Contribution Categories:
___
Small $60*
___
Basic $200 (Intersect sent
to up to 3 individuals* & recognition in Intersect 2x/year)
___
Sustaining $500
- Intersect sent to up to 15 individuals by email or local fax*
Please
attach separate sheet for additional persons:
Salutation: Mr. Mrs. Ms. Miss
Name:
Title:
Organization:
Address:
Email:
Home
Phone:
Work
Phone:
Fax:
Affiliation(s):
Send
WRN updates via:
___
email
___ regular mail
___
fax
___ do not send updates
___
Interested in volunteering. Please
contact me.
___
Please keep my name/information confidential.
Please
return this form with a check payable to WRN, 1777 Church St, NW, Washington
DC, 20036. WRN is a 501c(3)
non-profit organization and contributions are tax deductible to the
extent allowed by law. Thank
you!
________________________________________________________________________________________
| 