CITY COUNCIL
ATTACHMENT D
Applicant Response to Appeal -
February 3, 2025
FARIVAR LITIGATION
G
LAW FIRM CONSULTANTS
Address: 18321 Ventura Blvd., Ste #750
Telephone: 818.796.2060
Tarzana, CA 91356
310.460.9626
Email: [email protected]
Facsimile: 818.812.7868
310.881.6986 UUUUU
"Legal Advice Personalized Beyond Your Life."
February 3, 2025
Via Email ([email protected])
City of Victorville
Re: Response To Appeal of Planning Commission Decision & Request for Extension
Project Name: 55555 Amargosa Warehouse Project
Case No.: PLAN23-00003
To the Honorable Members of the City Council:
Farivar Law Firm, APC represents 55555 Amargosa LLC (the "Applicant"), the proponent of a meticulously planned and environmentally compliant warehouse development located at the southwest corner of Cactus Road and Mesa Linda Avenue in Victorville. We write on behalf of the Applicant, in response to the appeal filed by the Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance (Appellant) regarding the Victorville Planning Commission's unanimous approval of the 55555 Amargosa Warehouse Project ("Project"). This Project was approved unanimously by the Planning Commission on January 8, 2025, following an extensive and legally compliant review process. Key highlights of the Project include:
Accordingly, this correspondence highlights the procedural and substantive deficiencies in the appeal, addresses Appellant's baseless claims, and urges the City Council to uphold the Planning Commission's decision, which was rendered after rigorous review and community input.
I. Environmental Compliance
The Project underwent a rigorous and transparent environmental review process, culminating in the preparation of a comprehensive Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) that fully complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The IS/MND addressed all potential environmental 1 Visit: FarivarLaw.com Email: [email protected]
Farivar Law Firm, APC
Response To Appeal of Planning Commission Decision & Request for Extension impacts, including air quality, greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), traffic, biological resources, and water usage, concluding that all impacts would be less than significant with mitigation measures in place. The document was supported by substantial evidence, meeting the legal standards established in Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal. (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, which requires agencies to base their conclusions on facts, expert analyses, and reasonable assumptions. As further described below, the thoroughness of this environmental analysis demonstrates the Applicant's commitment to sustainability and environmental stewardship.
1. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions: The Project's GHG emissions were assessed using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), confirming compliance with stringent standards set by the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD).
The mitigation measures implemented include:
c Deployment of Tier 4 Final construction equipment, which incorporates the latest emissions control technology to minimize air pollution during construction.
Installation of solar-ready infrastructure and integration of energy-efficient HVAC systems to reduce operational emissions.
c Alignment with Victorville's Climate Action Plan (CAP) and California's policies under AB 32 and SB 375, ensuring the Project contributes positively to statewide climate goals.
Appellant has failed to provide any evidence disputing these findings, and their generalized claims are insufficient to challenge the IS/MND under California Clean Energy Committee v. City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 173.
2. Traffic and Circulation: A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) confirmed that the Project would not cause significant congestion or exceed Level of Service (LOS) standards. The Applicant committed to funding roadway improvements and implementing designated truck routes to minimize impacts. These measures comply with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.4 and Victorville's Circulation Element, ensuring the Project integrates seamlessly into the city's infrastructure.
3. Water Resources: The Project incorporates innovative low-impact development (LID) techniques designed to manage stormwater on-site effectively, including:
• Bioswales and permeable paving to reduce runoff and enhance groundwater recharge.
Detention basins capable of handling 100-year storm events, ensuring long-term resilience against extreme weather conditions.
The Victorville Water District verified that the Project's water demand during both construction and operation would remain well within available supply, negating concerns about resource overuse.
4. Biological Resources: A detailed biological resource assessment conducted by qualified consultants determined that the Project site does not support sensitive habitats or endangered species. Nevertheless, the Applicant adopted proactive measures, including:
Farivar Law Firm, APC
Response Ta Appeal of Planning Commission Decision & Request for Extension Pre-construction surveys to ensure no harm to wildlife.
Habitat enhancement initiatives to promote biodiversity.
5. Cumulative Impacts: The IS/MND carefully evaluated cumulative impacts in conjunction with other regional developments, confirming that the Project's incremental contribution to cumulative environmental effects would be less than significant with mitigation.
Il. Community Engagement and Support
The Applicant's engagement efforts exemplity a best-practice approach to public participation, fostering transparency, collaboration, and meaningful dialogue with the Victorville community. These efforts underline the Project's alignment with local priorities and its commitment to addressing community concerns.
1. Comprehensive Public Notification: The Applicant exceeded CEQA and local ordinance requirements by distributing detailed public notices in advance of the Planning Commission hearing. Notifications included:
• Physical mailers to residents and businesses within the Project's vicinity. • Email communications to stakeholders and interested parties. c Online postings on the City's website to ensure broader accessibility.
Informational materials highlighted the Project's benefits, environmental compliance, and avenues for public feedback.
The Applicant also conducted targeted outreach to local organizations, neighborhood groups, and labor unions, including the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters, ensuring broad-based support.
2. Planning Commission Hearing: At the January 8, 2025, Planning Commission hearing, the Applicant presented:
• Comprehensive environmental findings from the IS/MND. • Detailed explanations of the Project's anticipated economic and social contributions. c Responses to potential concerns raised during earlier engagement sessions.
Notably, no objections or opposition were raised during the hearing, reflecting the Project's widespread acceptance. The Commission's unanimous approval underscores the Project's alignment with the City's General Plan and community priorities.
3. Ongoing Collaboration: The Applicant remains committed to maintaining open lines of communication with stakeholders throughout the Project's development and operational phases. Regular updates and check-ins will ensure that community benefits are sustained over time.
Farivar Law Firm, APC
Response To Appeal of Planning Commission Decision & Request for Extension IH. Economic and Social Benefits
The Project enjoys broad community support, underscored by the endorsements of labor unions, including the Wester States Regional Council of Carpenters, which signed a Community Workforce and Training Agreement (CWTA) with the Applicant. This agreement guarantees hundreds of high-paying construction jobs and long-term operational positions, prioritizing local workers and promoting workforce development through apprenticeship programs. The Project will also generate millions in tax revenue, funding public services such as schools, infrastructure, and public safety. More specifically:
1. Job Creation: The Project is projected to create over 300 construction jobs, prioritizing local union workers and fostering workforce development. In addition, the Applicant's agreements with local labor unions incorporate apprenticeship programs, enabling underserved workers to gain valuable skills and secure pathways into skilled trades. Furthermore, upon completion, the warehouse will generate numerous permanent operational positions, offering stable employment opportunities for Victorville residents.
2. Tax Revenue and Public Services: The Project will also generate millions of dollars in tax revenue annually, directly benefiting, among other things, local schools through increased funding for educational programs and facilites, public safety initiatives, including police and fire services, and infrastructure projects that enhance the City's transportation and utility systems.
These contributions will strengthen Victorville's fiscal stability and service delivery capacity.
3. Support for Local Businesses: By attracting additional investment to the area, the Project will, among other things, stimulate economic activity for local service providers and small businesses, and create demand for ancillary services, including logistics, maintenance, and transportation. The warehouse's operations will integrate seamlessly with existing regional supply chains, amplifying its economic impact.
4. Infrastructure Enhancements: The Applicant has committed to funding substantial infrastructure improvements, including, but not limited to roadway enhancements to improve traffic flow and safety at key intersections, and upgraded traffic signals and pedestrian pathways to accommodate increased usage. These upgrades will serve both the Project and the broader Victorville community, ensuring long-term benefits.
5. Social Equity and Inclusion: Through partnerships with labor unions and local organizations, the Project prioritizes, fair wages and safe working conditions for all employees, and inclusive hiring practices that provide opportunities for underrepresented populations. These efforts align with broader social equity goals, ensuring that the Project's economic benefits extend to all segments of the community.
IV. The Appeal Should Be Denied for Procedural Deficiencies and Lack of Merit Farivar Law Firm, APC
Response To Appeal of Planning Commission Decision & Request for Extension The appeal is both procedurally and substantively defective and fails to meet the requirements of standing under applicable legal standards, and the City Council should uphold the Planning Commission's unanimous approval of the Project.
1. The Applicant Failed to Exhaust the Administrative Remedies.
California law requires appellants to exhaust administrative remedies before filing an appeal. As reaffirmed in Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. City of San Diego (2011) 196 cal.App.4th 515, appellants must participate actively in the public review process, raising objections during hearings and submitting comments when appropriate. The Applicant did neither. Despite being properly notified of the Planning Commission hearing on January 8, 2025, and receiving multiple opportunities to provide input during the environmental review period, Appellant failed to participate. No representative from the organization appeared at the hearing, and no objections or evidence were submitted during the public comment period. Such conduct constitutes a failure to exhaust administrative remedies, precluding their right to appeal. Prior to the hearing and after the appeal was filed, Applicant reached out directly to Appellant's Executive Director, Joe Bourgeois, offering to meet and address any concerns. This outreach went either unanswered or without receipt of a meaningful response, further underscoring Appellant's lack of engagement. True and correct copies of the email communications confirming the foregoing are attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated herein by reference.
Moreover, the appeal raises significant questions regarding Appellant's standing. CEQA requires that appellants demonstrate a direct and particularized interest in the project. In Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan Beach (2011) 52 Cal.4th 155, the Califomia Supreme Court clarified that an organization must show concrete and specific harm to establish standing under CEQA. Appellant has provided no evidence of direct harm or environmental impact that affects their members. Their absence from the administrative process further underscores the lack of standing and undermines the legitimacy of their claims.
2. Substantive Failures: Compliance with CEQA Requirements The Planning Commission's unanimous approval reflects the community's overwhelming support for the Project, as no objections were raised during the hearing. In contrast, Appellant's failure to engage during the public process demonstrates a lack of good faith and undermines their credibility. Courts have consistently rejected CEQA appeals that are unsupported by substantive evidence or public participation, as seen in Sierra Club v. City of Orange (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 523.
Appellant's post-hearing appeal is a transparent attempt to obstruct a lawful and beneficial development project. CEQA is not a tool to delay progress but a framework for informed decision-making and environmental protection. The City Council has a duty to reject appeals that lack procedural compliance and substantive merit, ensuring that Victorville reaps the economic, social, and environmental benefits of this transformative project.
By filing an appeal after failing to engage in the administrative process, Appellant seeks to create unnecessary delays and burdens for the Applicant, the City, and the community. Such tactics are inconsistent with the principles of CEQA, which prioritize efficient resolution of legitimate concerns. The appeal represents a last-minute effort to disrupt a well-vetted and overwhelmingly supported Project that complies fully with CEQA and local planning regulations. The City Council should:
Farivar Law Firm, APC
Pag. 6/6
Response To Appeal of Planning Commission Decision & Reques r Extension
1. Affirm the Planning Commission's unanimous approval of the Project.
2. Reject the appeal as frivolous and procedurally defective.
3. Encourage Appellant to engage constructively in future proceedings rather than relying on obstructionist tactics.
In addition, in the interest of fostering a collaborative resolution, we respectfully request that the City Council grant a 45-day extension to allow additional time for meaningful engagement with the Appellant. addressing any specific concerns raised by the Appellant in good faith. This extension would provide the opportunity to thoroughly evaluate the issues and explore potential resolutions without further delaying the ultimate approval and benefits of the Project. Such a collaborative approach aligns with CEQA's emphasis on transparency and informed decision-making while ensuring that all parties have ample opportunity to engage constructively.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. We remain available to address any questions or provide additional information as needed.
Very truly yours,
FARIVAR LAW FIRM, APC
Is/ Fahim Farivar, Esq.
Fahim Farivar, Esq.,
LLM, MBT, CPA
Enclosure,
EXHIBIT A
From: Eahim Farivar
To: Executive Director
CC: Assistant. Executive Director: Ramon Amaya; Steven Pieckom; Adam Salida Boc: Simon Bouzaglou: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Planning case # PLAN23-00003 - Appeal of Planning Commission Decision for 55555 Amargosa Warehouse Project *** Confidential Settlement Communications ***
Date: Monday, February 3, 2025 10:02:00 AM
Attachments: image001.jng
Image002 gif
Mr. Bourgeois,
I am not sure who these people you referenced below are. I have no record of talking to them. However, today is our deadline, and I'd like to resolve this matter if possible. I'm behind my desk until noon. So, please contact me to discuss a possible resolution.
Thanks.
Fahim Farivar, Esq.
J.D., C.P.A., M.B.T., LL.M.
FARIVAR
LAW FIRM
Direct Line: 818.796.5405
Facsimile: 818.812.7868
Cell: 818.731.1322
From: Executive Director <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 31, 2025 5:39 PM
To: Fahim Farivar <[email protected]>
Cc: Assistant Executive Director <[email protected]>; Ramon Amaya <[email protected]>; Steven Piepkorn <[email protected]>; Adam Salcido <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Planning case # PLAN23-00003 - Appeal of Planning Commission Decision for 55555 Amargosa Warehouse Project *** Confidential Settlement Communications *** Mr. Farivar,
Please contact Gary Ho @ Blum, Collins & Ho. Mr. Ho has advised me that he spoke to you previously about this project.
Thank you,
Joe Bourgeois
Executive Director
Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance
B - (951) 279-4697
From: Fahim Farivar <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2025 3:55 PM
To: Executive Director <[email protected]> Cc: Assistant Executive Director <[email protected]>; Ramon Amaya <[email protected]>; Steven Piepkorn <[email protected]>; Adam Salcido <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Planning case # PLAN23-00003 - Appeal of Planning Commission Decision for 55555 Amargosa Warehouse Project *** Confidential Settlement Communications *** Mr. Bourgeois:
I hope this message finds you well. I am following up regarding the appeal filed by Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance concerning the approval of the 55555 Amargosa Warehouse Project by the Victorville Planning Commission.
Over the past few weeks, we have made several attempts to reach out to your organization to address this matter constructively. As detailed in our prior correspondence dated January 7 and January 28, 2025, we have extended multiple invitations to engage in dialogue and explore potential solutions that address any concems you might have regarding the project. These efforts have included written communications, calls, and offers to meet at your convenience.
Despite these efforts, we have yet to receive any response or indication of your willingness to engage in discussions. As you know, the project has undergone rigorous review and enjoys strong community support, including endorsements from key labor unions. The appeal, which was filed without prior participation in the Planning Commission hearing, introduces procedural and substantive questions that we believe could have been resolved through direct communication.
We remain available to provide clarification or address any specific concerns regarding the project's environmental compliance, community benefits, or other aspects.
In the interest of faimess and avoiding unnecessary delays, we kindly request your response by February 3, 2025, at 12:00 p.m. If
We remain committed to constructive dialogue and hope to resolve this matter in a manner that aligns with both your organization's mission and the community's best interests.
Thank you for your attention to this matter, and we look forward to your prompt response.
Sincerely,
Fahim Farivar, Esq.
J.D., C.P.A., M.B.T., LL.M.
FARIVAR
LAW FIRM
Direct Line: 818.796.5405
Facsimile: 818.812.7868
Cell: 818.731.1322
From: Fahim Farivar
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2025 12:56 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Planning case # PLAN23-00003 - Appeal of Planning Commission Decision for 55555 Amargosa Warehouse Project *** Confidential Settlement Communications *** Mr. Bourgeois:
lam writing on behalf of 55555 Amargosa LLC regarding the recent appeal filed by Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance following the approval of the 55555 Amargosa Warehouse Project by the Victorville Planning Commission.
It is both surprising and disappointing to see this appeal filed after your organization failed to engage in the process in a meaningful way. Not only did your office fail to attend the Planning Commission hearing on January 8, 2025, but I personally reached out to you in advance of the hearing to address any concems your organization might have had. Despite this effort, I received no response from you or your office.
Given these circumstances, your appeal raises significant procedural and substantive issues that warrant serious reconsideration. I urge your organization to withdraw the appeal and engage constructively to resolve any legitimate concems.
1. Procedural Failures and Standing Issues
Your organization's absence at the Planning Commission hearing undermines the legitimacy of this appeal.
Califomia law requires parties to exhaust administrative remedies in good faith before pursuing further legal action. By failing to attend the hearing, Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance effectively waived its right to contest the approval of the project.
• Your organization was provided with ample notice of the hearing and had every opportunity to participate. The absence of any representative from your office at the hearing strongly suggests a lack of direct involvement or genuine interest in the matter. • Courts have consistently held that standing to appeal or challenge an administrative decision requires active participation in the underlying proceedings (Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. City of San Diego (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 515). Your organization's lack of participation calls into question its standing to pursue this appeal.
Furthermore, the project was overwhelmingly and unanimously approved by the Union and the Planning Commission after a fair and transparent review process. The absence of objections at the hearing highlights the broad community and stakeholder support for this project.
2. Substantive Weaknesses in the Appeal
The appeal fails to articulate any specific, evidence-based objections to the project or the Planning Commission's decision. The project underwent a rigorous environmental review process, including the preparation of an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND), which determined that all potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. • The IS/MND comprehensively evaluated issues such as air quality, traffic, water usage, and greenhouse gas emissions. Mitigation measures have been adopted to address all identified concems. The process adhered fully to CEQA requirements and reflects substantial evidence supporting the projects approval. • The project enjoys overwhelming support from local labor unions, including the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters, as evidenced by the signed Community Workforce and Training Agreement (CWTA) and Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). This support underscores the project's alignment with community and labor interests.
The vague and unsupported claims in your appeal fail to demonstrate any legal or factual basis for reversing the Planning Commission's decision.
3. Negative Impact of Prolonged Delays
Filing this appeal introduces unnecessary delays, obstructing a praject that will bring significant benefits to the Victorville community, including:
• Hundreds of union-backed construction jobs and permanent operational positions, boosting the local economy.
• Increased tax revenue and infrastructure improvements benefiting the community at large. • Energy-efficient designs and mitigation measures that align with Califomia's climate goals.
While the above-is not an exhaustive list, prolonging this process harms not only the project's stakeholders but also the broader Victorville community W... a team a Preme he commic and sociall opportunities this development will create.
Before the Planning Commission hearing, I reached out to your office to discuss any concerns you might have had about the project. Unfortunately, my outreach went unanswered, and no representative from your organization attended the hearing to present objections.
Your decision to bypass this opportunity for dialogue and then file an appeal post-approval suggests a lack of good faith engagement. Appeals filed under such circumstances are often viewed as procedural maneuvering rather than genuine advocacy for environmental justice.
Given the procedural failings and substantive weaknesses of your appeal, we believe it is in the best interest of all parties to resolve this matter amicably. To that end, we propose the following:
1. We are willing to meet with your organization to address specific environmental or procedural conces and provide further clarification about the project's compliance and benefits.
2. In light of the issues outlined above, we strongly encourage you to withdraw the appeal and avoid unnecessary delays and legal costs.
By working collaboratively, we can ensure that this project moves forward in a way that aligns with shared goals for sustainable development and community progress.
Please let us know by Friday, January 31, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. whether your organization is open to discussing a resolution. If we do not receive a response, we will proceed to defend the Planning Commission's decision vigorously and seek all appropriate remedies, including recovery of costs associated with this appeal.
We remain committed to constructive dialogue and encourage your organization to take this opportunity to engage in good faith.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your prompt response.
Sincerely,
Fahim Farivar, Esq.
J.D., C.P.A., M.B.T., LL.M.
FARIVAR
LAW FIRM
Direct Line: 818.796.5405
Facsimile: 818.812.7868
Cell: 818.731.1322
From: Fahim Farivar
Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2025 11:30 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; spiepkorn@ goldenstateeja.com; [email protected] Subject: Planning case # PLAN23-00003 - - Union-Supported Project Dear Mr. Bourgeois,
My firm represents 55555 Amargosa LLC with regards to the above-referenced matter. I am writing regarding your inquiry on January 3, 2025, and your inquiry regarding the appeal process concerning the 55555 Amargosa Warehouse Project. I want to address your questions thoroughly while providing important context about the project's robust support, compliance with legal standards, and overwhelming benefits to the Victorville community.
While the appeal process exists to ensure fairness, I would like to highlight the significant time, expense, and uncertainty that an appeal entails. Appeals can delay essential projects, hinder economic progress, and place unnecessary burdens on organizations like yours.
The 55555 Amargosa Warehouse Project has been developed with exceptional care to meet and exceed California's stringent environmental and legal standards. This includes:
• Full CEQA Compliance: The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) thoroughly assessed potential environmental impacts and determined that any concerns are less than significant with mitigation.
• Broad Community Support: The project has received strong endorsements from unions, local stakeholders, and community leaders who see the warehouse as a critical driver of economic growth and local job creation.
Given this, an appeal is unlikely to yield any substantive changes to the approval but will only result in unnecessary delays and costs to all parties involved.
The project is backed by key labor organizations, including the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters, under a signed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and a Community Workforce and Training Agreement (CWTA). See copies of fully executed of these documents attached. These agreements ensure, among other things, seamless collaboration between developers and labor unions to prevent disputes or disruptions, employment of highly trained union members, ensuring quality construction and adherence to labor standards, and job creation of high-paying construction and operational jobs for local workers, directly contributing to Victorville's economic development.
Furthermore, Union representatives have actively advocated for this project in public hearings and correspondence, further cementing its importance to the local community. We believe your organization's principles align with these labor-driven initiatives, and collaboration on this project could bring mutual benefits.
Your organization has consistently advocated for environmental justice. This project achieves those objectives by:
• Incorporating energy-efficient designs, minimizing GHG emissions, and adhering to Califomia's rigorous environmental laws.
• Promoting fair labor practices and creating pathways for underrepresented workers to access skilled trades through union apprenticeships.
By supporting this project, Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance can further its mission of equitable environmental stewardship while contributing to Victorville's economic vitality.
We strongly encourage you to consider the benefits of collaboration rather than pursuing an appeal. An appeal, while technically an option, would result in unnecessary conflict, delays, and resources spent on a project that has already demonstrated overwhelming compliance and community support.
Working together, we can amplify the positive impact of this project, ensuring it serves as a model for sustainable and equitable development If you have specific concems or suggestions, we would be happy to discuss them and work toward solutions that align with your goals.
I welcome the opportunity to discuss any concerns or questions you may have and am confident we can find common ground that benefits all parties. To this end and given the urgency of this matter, I can make myself available this afternoon and tomorrow morning to further discuss this matter.
If we do not hear from you further on this matter, we will proceed under the assumption that Golden State Environmental Justice Alliarice supports moving the project forward without objection.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Fahins Parvar. Pag.
I.D., CI'A., M.B.T.. LL..M.
FÄRIVAR
LAW FIRM
Address: 18321 Ventura Blvd / Suite 750
Tarzana, CA 91356
Main Office: 818.796.2060 Ext. 1000
Facsimile: 818.812.7868
Facsimile: 310.881.6986
Direct Line: 818.796.5405
Cell: 818.731.1322
Visit FarivarLaw.com
"Legal Advice Personalized Beyond Your Life"
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information contained in this transmission may be privileged and confidential information, and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it. Thank you.
CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To comply with U.S. Treasury Department and IRS regulations, we are required to advise you that, unless expressly stated otherwise, any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this transmittal, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by any person for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed in this e-mail or attachment.