Well, good morning, everyone.

How are we this morning?

Right?

We're good?

Okay.

Is the recording device ready?

It's ready.

All right.

I'd like to uh I'm gonna call the Board of Supervisors to order.

That was my that's a pretty good gavel there.

I don't want to be knuckles what, but we're good.

Um Mr.

Howan, may I have a roll call, please?

Supervisor shooting here Supervisor Horton Supervisor White Supervisor Giovanni.

Here, mayor Bagwell Forum.

Thank you so much.

If you guys would join me and uh we'll do the budget.

We just want to use that.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate that.

Okay.

We're now on to agenda item four this morning, which is our opening public comment.

Does anyone have any beginning?

Opening public comment that they need.

Okay, then we're gonna be moving right along.

We're gonna go with agenda item 5A, which is just can everyone back there hear me?

Good.

We we thought we had good acoustics, but I wanted to to make sure.

So everyone.

Um so we're gonna talk about Carson City strategic planning for fiscal years 27 through 31.

Um Ms.

Hicks, are you gonna start us off?

I am gonna start us off.

Okay.

Good morning.

Um, for the record, my name is Stephanie Hicks, and I'm the deputy city manager for Carson City.

And this morning we're gonna be launching our strategic planning for fiscal year 2027 through 2031.

Um I do have some help today with me this morning.

I have Alexis Philippi, our um executive office manager, and she's gonna be working with me through the process and James Salanoa, our community relations manager.

We have internally set up a small working group, small team that also includes City Manager Glenn Martell and Human Resources Director Um Jeff Coolam.

So that's your that's your team taking you through this project for our next five years.

But before we talk about our future, I just want to talk a little bit about um our past and what we accomplished in our last strategic plan.

When I joined the city manager's office in 2019, one of my very first assignments was to work on the city's strategic plan.

Um and that process started in 2019.

The board adopted the plan in 2021, September of 2021.

Um it was a much longer period than we intend this process to take because of that dreaded C word that happened there in 2020 that kind of diverted things.

But we're very excited um to move forward on this process.

But oftentimes we hear in the city manager's office or from the public or even um from other people who work in the city, you know, why do we focus on the things that we do?

Why why are we working on this project and why are we not doing this other thing?

And our strategic plan is really what sets that alignment for us and sets our priorities so that we know where we can allocate our staff and resources.

It helps us to know where we can focus our energy, um, strengthen our operations, and then it also ensures that employees and other stakeholders are working towards common goals.

We had a very robust strategic plan um last time.

I think we had 136 different tactics we identified to complete.

Um we've done a fantastic job of getting there, and everyone should really be proud of the accomplishments that we've made.

But just because we identify something in the plan doesn't it also doesn't mean we're gonna get to everything.

It it's our goals, it's our objectives to get there, but we may not.

So it really just helps us to set and plan our priorities.

Um it helps us to be in line with the city's mission and vision, which we're gonna talk about a little bit today.

So really you can think of a strategic plan as the city's roadmap, or for you techie people, a Google map or a ways map, and it tells us how to get where we need to go.

One other thing, and um kind of preparing for this that I heard from people was well, didn't we just do this?

What was that?

What was that plan we just did?

Didn't we just do our master plan?

Why are we doing another strategic plan?

So I just wanted to take a minute to talk about the differences between a master plan and a strategic plan.

Um they really do um complement each other and they're often used together to answer different questions, but a comprehensive master plan, which um you know help Sullivan, our our community and economic development director, um, spend a lot of time on with her team.

It's usually a 10 to 30 year period, it's very broad, um, often is like spatial or land um uh related, and it provides a framework for future um decisions.

But a strategic plan is a much more medium-term, three to five year focus.

It's very selective and prioritized, and it emphasizes what to do now and next.

It's not spatially related, it's performance-driven, um, and and it really ties closely to our resources, our budgets, and accountability.

That doesn't mean though, that all of the good work that Hope did in those listening sessions isn't helpful to us through this process because actually it really is.

And the key themes from the master plan, which I just listed, some of these here are going to be very valuable to us as we work through and we prioritize things for our strategic plan.

One very important part of our um previous strategic plan and what we hope to do for our our next strategic plan was our annual reporting dashboard.

Um we made sure that we incorporated performance measures into our strategic plan to help us monitor the progress between setting those goals and achieving them.

James is gonna walk us through the process we used and our our um reporting requirements thank you, James Salanoa, community relations manager for the record.

Um Stephanie mentioned that when she first started working for the city manager's office, uh she was tasked with uh the strategic plan.

And this was back in 2019.

I started working for the city manager's office in December 2021, and one of the first tasks I was asked to participate in is the presentation for the annual reviews.

Um so it gave me, it gave us a good opportunity because we nothing was built yet, so we had the opportunity to kind of be a little creative with the process.

Um there were strong foundational elements already in place.

Uh the strategic strategic plan had a scope of work, it was organized into pillars, uh, each with its associated tactics.

Um they had their own due dates and it included performance measures that each department was responsible for.

Um we knew that we had to report this to the Board of Supervisors, but we also had to consider uh how would be how it would be for the public to see this presentation.

So we took into consideration that a member of the public may not have been following the strategic plan from its inception.

Uh kind of like when you're watching a movie and three-quarters of the way through, someone comes in and starts asking questions about what's happening.

Um you answer their questions, but you really want to tell them to, you know, maybe watch this movie from the beginning on your own time.

Um we didn't want to tell the public that, so uh we in designing this annual report uh reframed our design asking two basic questions.

One, if this was the first time the public sees this report, could they easily understand it?

And two, if they wanted more in-depth information, how can we provide that for them?

Um and the zo and the results that we've been presenting for the past four years is is the way that we answered those questions.

Um good design tends to answer questions before people ask them.

Uh the header uh answers what the page is about.

Uh if there was a if there was one main point we wanted to take home, uh people to take home was to remember that in 2025 we had 112 tasks that were on schedule uh out of the 126.

The shapes, text, and colors uh framed to simplify the data and make it easy to digest.

We listed this the strategic plan to the right and highlighted the vision, mission, mission, and values so that the public knew uh there was direction behind these tactics.

And if the public wanted to learn more about the strategic plan, we provided a link to the original 50-page uh 53-page documents.

For those who walked in halfway through the movie and started asking questions about what was reported in years prior, we provided links to the previous annual reports.

Um and if you wanted the breakdown, and if you wanted to break down of the number of tactics per pillar, we provided graphs for each of those.

And as you click on each pillar, you get a breakdown of the tactics and a category listed with each of those sections there.

It's not shown here, but at the bottom of each of these pages, there is a link that opens up a PDF document that highlights more specific details, things that notes that each of the departments have put into it.

So if people want more in-depth explanation on some of these tactics that we have completed, they can open that document and that information would be there for them.

So moving forward, you know, what would the feature of annual reports look like?

We plan for it to look something similar to this, but we are also open to any of the feedback that we receive today to implement in the next annual reports.

All of these plans or implementations of these tactics are all things that hopefully as we reflect and look back on the past four years, we can give ourselves uh credit and and um knowing that we accomplished so much in such a short time frame.

Um it is our hope that we put our best work forward in preparation for the next strategic plan.

Yes.

Thank you.

Okay.

Any questions so far?

We'll keep on going.

We'll talk about, we'll talk about the future.

So first of all, I have to point out my big typo on the header of this.

Um our strategic plan time frame is 2027 to 2031.

So we're not we won't add an extra year unless you guys uh instruct me to do so.

Um but our process for this next strategic planning cycle is going to be very similar as we um kind of walk through the previous process.

Um what we're gonna start with and what we have started with is gathering information.

So we've had some conversations already.

Um we um Lexi's gonna talk a little bit about our public survey that we will be launching, um, and then um we are gonna be working with our departments and stakeholders to set up tactics and identify those things that we wish to propose to the board to achieve.

Um that's gonna help us really how to allocate our resources.

And one thing that we've really tried to do this time, and what um kind of sets our time frame is we really want to align this process with our budget process.

So we can be talking about what things we'd like to achieve in the next five years while we're also working on our budget.

And while this is set out uh to a five-year plan, we still talk about five-year capital, five-year other things as we as we do go through our our budget process.

So we felt the timing of that would be really good.

Umce our plan is approved, then we would implement the plan.

And similar to the previous plan, we'll make our progress and report out annually.

So for the next few minutes, what we would like to do is talk a little bit about the city's vision and mission.

Um and I had an opportunity to talk with each of the board members, and um the thought, and I think this is consistent upon upon everyone that I've talked with is we have a good vision and we have a good mission, it could use a little refresh.

So what we did was um that little team that we talked about, and with a little bit of help of Madison AI, even we um we came up with some different options as to what could be uh a refresh of our um vision.

So our existing vision is that um a leader among cities as an inviting prosperous community where people live, work, and play.

Well, we've proposed as a change, but again, we'd like to have that conversation and Lexi's ready to write on the fly.

Um we're proposing it to be changed to foster a vibrant and safe community, acknowledge its history, prepare for its future.

And just wanted to open that up for feedback.

So I um I like the direction it's going.

I would like to recommend um more action verbiage.

So fostering that I'm comfortable with foster.

Okay.

A vibrant and safe community, celebrate our history, and prepare for our future.

I I think our versus its shows that that ownership and that pride in our community.

Did you say preparing for the future?

Yeah, so it's either like fostering a vibrant and safe community, celebrating our history, preparing for our future, or leaving you know the the verbs without the ING without the ING.

Okay.

Okay.

Any other thoughts on that?

Okay.

I think it's looking uh the the its versus an R is a grammar issue that deals with inanimate anyway, organizations, things like that.

I think we can it's like our seal is it, not our.

A lot of people want to say our because you're thinking community, whole community.

And so since it's Carson City's vision, we're speaking for our community because our community is what Carson City is.

Um I think it's it's um a more specific audience than the state seal.

Okay.

It feels more inclusive too.

I mean, the seal is a it's a symbol.

It's uh I mean this is a logo.

This is meant to be engaging.

That's that's how I view it.

Okay.

I I think the suggestion that uh City made okay.

All right, so just to read it back, fostering a vibrant and safe community, celebrating our history, preparing for our future.

All right.

Are we good?

All right.

Great.

So we're gonna move on to our mission.

Um our existing mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of life and heritage of Carson City for present and future generations of residents, workers and visitors.

We have proposed to improve quality of life by providing exemplary, open and forward-thinking public services, empowering a resilient community.

Any thoughts or changes to that one?

I I wish it could be simpler.

I I like things that people can roll off their tons and can support.

I I think that I don't know.

I don't think most of us could spit that out.

If somebody asked for our mission statement, I'm not sure what the change is, but I I agree.

It it feels textbook.

Okay.

Um about just why can't we just improve quality of life?

We can get rid of by providing exemplary open and forward thinking public services.

Improve quality of life by I like the existing that we just keep what we have?

Yeah, we're trying to rewrite something.

Okay.

Okay.

When you use the language improving quality of life, you're necessarily implying it's not good now.

And I would say it's pretty damn good.

Okay, so we'll keep existing.

That's the consensus.

That's easy.

And I want to ask, uh because we're doing this as a more participatory and as we go or we're not voting on each section.

If any of you in the public have any comments about any, please just raise your hand if you have some great idea you would like to share with us.

I I want you to know the strategic plan is a participatory action.

And even though we because we're not taking individual votes on each item, please raise your hand so that you can participate if you'd like.

Yeah, do you have an idea?

I agree with you.

I like the existing you want to keep the existing one too?

All right.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right.

Anyone else?

Make it if you want to match the way we just changed the other verb.

I and G verb.

All right.

Preserving it and while we're if you're doing the same.

So those statements fit together.

Okay, we can do that.

Easy enough.

All right.

So the next thing that we just wanted to go over, you know, based on our mission and vision, the board has identified our goals, which have been considered the six pillars of the community.

And these have been consistent.

They were in obviously our last strategic plan.

They were in the plan before that.

I I don't know if maybe even before that, these were the pillars of our community.

But we wanted to just review them.

The feedback that I've received so far is that they were they were accurate.

They are our goals, but if there's something we want to tweak, we can do that at this point.

So we're open to suggestions on that.

Does anyone have another?

And we're not limited to six just because we had six.

I want to throw that out there too.

Is there something we're not gonna get too many?

Yeah.

Right.

Yeah.

It's hard to think of something you can't fit in the already.

And we've done a really good job of doing that in previous years.

So okay.

All right.

So over the next several months, we're gonna work to um identify the objectives that will align with each of these pillars.

Um the departments have already started doing that brainstorming, and we're collecting that information, so that will be part of what we do bring forward to you in the future.

So I'm going to turn it over to Lexi to talk a little bit about what our process will be from here.

All right, good morning, Feather Record.

I'm Alexis Philippi, the executive office manager.

Um, this is my first time ever working on a strategic plan, knowing what a strategic plan is.

Um, so it's super exciting opportunity to be able to present in front of you all.

Um so this slide here is kind of a roadmap that's gonna navigate us through the strategic planning process.

So today we are have gone over the vision, mission, and strategic priorities.

And then as well this morning, we launched our public survey at 8 a.m.

So it is now available.

Um, and I'll go over where you can find that on the next slide.

Um we're doing four community outreaches, um, one being today, and then our next one will be February 26th, which is our brown bag brigade, which is for internal employees.

So we hope that you all will encourage your employees to attend.

We're trying to reach as many people as possible.

The next one will be um March 12th, which will be at the community center.

This one will be after hours at 5:30, and this is open to anybody in the public to come in and go through this same presentation.

Um last one will be March 18th at the Chamber of Commerce Coffee and Conversation event.

Um after that, we will work on the strategies and action plan development with all of the departments gathering information, and then that will lead us into the first four supervisors meeting.

We'll bring this to for review, and then we're gonna bring it a second time for the final adoption of the strategic plan.

Um I forgot to mention that today a press release will go out about the launch of the survey as well.

So on this slide on the left-hand side, there's a QR code.

This QR code will take you to the page on the right hand side that you can see.

Um the little icon with the calendar emoji is not there anymore.

There's gonna be two links now on the left hand side.

There's gonna be the public survey in English, and then on the right hand side, the public survey is in Spanish.

The survey is short and sweet.

It's about 20 questions.

There are a few multiple uh written responses at the end.

Um they're meant to be short and to the point.

We don't expect people to write a novel.

We don't want people taking a lot of time on this.

Um, we would like if each and every one of you could take the survey at some point.

It doesn't have to be today.

Um, but like I said, we're trying to get as many responses as possible.

Um the survey will be open until March 23rd.

And that is it.

Does anybody have any questions?

So what if someone doesn't want to take the survey?

What's the can they just email the city executive office?

What people can email us.

We are really pushing the survey.

We really want people because you know the way that we can collect the data is much easier, more clean.

Um but I mean, if people don't understand, don't know where to find it, they of course can come to us in the executive office and we can help you to it.

Um I mean, we haven't really discussed if people wanted to email.

I just know the plan was to really press directing people to the survey.

And we will take it in any format that people want to provide it to us.

It just allows us to be able to report more consistently back to you through a survey what information that we received from the public, but but we will we'll take it in in any way they want.

If they want to call us or email or meet, we'd be glad to do that.

We can even print it off.

Yes, we could if they want to, you know, check mark their answers.

Yes, absolutely.

Because I know there's many that's hard to imagine, but still don't use a computer much.

Right.

So I just want to make sure everyone has an opportunity if they want to participate.

Um, okay.

All right.

I'll I'll just ask if there are again any public thoughts or anything.

Yes.

I just have a question on the design length.

What's the average length of time to complete a survey?

I would say five minutes at most.

Five to ten, yeah, five to ten depending on how much you want to get into the written response questions.

Mostly everything else is you know, multiple choice ranking, things like that.

Um, so it really depends on how detailed you want to go.

Um, but you have you have as much time as you would like, but it should really only take you five to ten minutes.

We wanted to make it short enough that people would want to do it, but it does give you the ability to provide more detailed information if you desire to spend more time.

So if it's live, can you show us?

Yeah, what are the types of questions on?

What are we asking the public?

I guess as I'm interested in.

Probably some questions we have to do.

Oh, our screen.

Miss Molly, while they're pulling it up.

Yeah.

Um wanted to do like a written because when we mentioned that some do not have computers, that's the majority of our customers.

And so if you have a written copy, we would help distribute that to our clients when they're doing transportation or homemaker services, and get you the email.

Okay.

Yeah, we can print off a few packets of it, and then if you we could mail them to you or if you want to come into the office and grab them.

Maybe email or email.

We can email that to you.

Okay.

Okay.

Thanks, Molly.

We appreciate that.

Because again, the more people we have completing gives you a broader look across all sections of the community.

Okay, so this right here is the one in English.

Can you guys see that?

Okay, so how long you've doing this.

Do you want us to read through it or just yes, okay?

Let's see what we got.

Okay, so we're looking for some demographics.

What is your current age?

How long have you lived in Carson City?

What is your residential zip code?

What is your current employment status?

Are you a business owner?

Do you feel safe in your neighborhood?

Have you visited or used a Carson City Park or recreation facility in the last 12 months?

How satisfied are you with the overall quality of life in Carson City?

How would you rate your overall satisfaction with working in Carson City?

How likely are you to recommend Carson City as a place to live, work, and play to a friend or colleague?

How would you rate your ability to report an issue in your neighborhood or community?

How would you rate the overall quality of customer service you receive from city employees?

How would you rate the variety of business and service establishments in Carson City?

This one's for you, Mayor.

Imagine you have a hundred dollars to invest in Carson City's future.

How would you distribute this amount across our six strategic goals for the next five years?

Please allocate the dollars below.

And then we have our six pillars.

Looking ahead to the next five years, what are the top three areas you'd most want the city to prioritize and improve?

And we've listed how you can pick three.

Yep, yeah.

Yeah, they can pick less than three, but the max is three.

How do you currently get information about the city's activities and decisions?

And these ones are text, so they can type in.

How can we make our community more business friendly and entrepreneurial?

List three of Carson's city's greatest attributes.

What would you change if you could change one thing to make our community a better place?

What are you willing to give up on or compromise to achieve community goals?

And then is there anything else you would like city leaders to know as they plan for our future?

That's a great survey.

Yeah, it shouldn't take so there was a couple of questions that uh such as do you enjoy working in Carson City?

Well, if you're retired, you're not gonna work here.

So I would suggest I'm not applicable.

And a couple of spots of probably one or two other questions that wouldn't apply to give them an option.

Yeah, I think we tried to make ones remote required and some weren't, but we'll verify that that will that's something people can select.

Perfect.

We were our one of our um one of our goals with the survey, and there were a lot of people that helped with this, you know.

Like I said, Glenn and Jeff and James and Lexi put it all together, did a fabulous job.

Um we were trying to make sure that we hit each of the pillars as well, so that we were asking questions that that had to do with each of our goals.

So I think we have a good broad um selection of questions without again it being too long that it would that would prohibit people from taking it.

So that they wouldn't understand what they're actually commenting on.

Sure.

Oh, wonderful.

Is everybody else in this last few well done?

Well, nice job.

Thank you guys.

We look forward to uh it's hard to believe I'm doing this again those days.

Wow, you're at this again.

Five years goes by really, really quick.

So CSS too.

Great job.

Thank you.

Pretty close on schedule.

Good.

Okay.

Ready?

Okay, we're gonna move on then to agenda item 5B, which is discussion and possible action regarding the future of the community services grants program, including options for continuation without changes, modifications, terminations, any aspect of the program.

Uh supervisor Gioni, your disclosure, please.

Uh 2818420 requires me to close a conflict of interest and stay in from voting when I have a disqualifying conflict.

My private commitment may serve as voluntary board member for advocates to end domestic violence, which has been a recipient of CSS G awards in the past.

I'll also take this opportunity to note that uh I am no longer a board member for RSDP, which I have previously declared.

I resigned from that position.

In addition, I'm employed by the health centers, which is also received CSSG funding.

Both advocates to win domestic violence and the Vital Health Centers are likely to apply for future awards.

And although I do not personally benefit from either organization receiving CSSG awards, I have produced reduced both organizations in my private capacity that represents continuing and substantial business relationships.

This agenda item may affect how awards are made in the future, or whether uh at all.

Uh, and it could have an impact on the organization because the reasonable personal position may be materially affected by these relationships.

I believe I have this follow up on conflict and will not be participating in or voting on this matter for most.

Thank you so much.

Okay, with that, uh Mrs.

Bennaboo.

Thank you very much.

Um, I'm going to go through a few slides here, and then um I have a slide that's just decision points where I'm going to toss it over and hopefully get some direction on this program.

So the program's been around for many, many years.

Um the current program is open citywide to nonprofits.

Um they kind of tell us what they can do for us, and then we um we approve uh funding.

We have two types of programs.

We have a non-competitive, which is a five-year program.

These are things that the city has to provide the service, but the nonprofits are able to do it at a better price for us.

So we engage the nonprofit to do those services.

So originally it was set up as 0.4% of the general fund annual expenditures.

Currently, during the last budget cycle, it was moved to the supplemental indigent fund.

So the funding is 293,425.

The competitive currently, or I'm sorry, non-competitive currently is 163.120.

This is the last round of that.

So next year would start a new, if if we're going in this direction, next year would start a new non-competitive cycle.

And then the competitive remaining was 13305.

During 2026, we did not award that entire amount.

So I think the funding is sufficient.

And then, of course, when this DSSG was established.

So this is a little bit of history.

Is do we want to continue this program exactly as we're doing it?

We would set the priorities based on the health department's needs assessment, which should be coming toward to you in April or May, I believe.

End of March.

End of March.

Awesome.

The more time we have the better.

So and then if we don't want to continue it as it is now, we could create some kind of a nonprofit partnership program and do contracting instead of grants.

With that, it brings up a question of whether they're a vendor or a subgrantee.

A vendor provides services to the city.

The city is the end user.

So this is governed by uniform guidance and the procurement rules, pretty much.

A grant sub-award provides financial assistance as a public benefit.

So services are provided directly to residents, and then they're subject to the entire uniform guidance.

So subrecipient monitoring, all that kind of stuff.

We can do a combination of grants or contracts, or stop the program altogether.

I mean, these are your four options.

Obviously, we probably don't want to do number four, but it is an option.

The next kind of discussion is data gathering.

I want to make sure we're reporting back to you the information that you want.

We do get quarterly reports from the nonprofits, and we used to kind of give you last year's data and then present the recommendations for the future year.

And somewhere in the last 10 years, that kind of got less and less on what we were reporting from a prior program, and suddenly all that they wanted us to put on the staff report was the awards for the future year.

So we've kind of reduced the amount of reporting we're doing just over time.

So we're definitely happy to add that back.

I can submit an email to the board with just the just the flat data, no discussion.

Or we can do that annual report again where we talk about last year's projects and then what we're recommending for the future.

All up in the air, whatever.

Go ahead.

Why would we just let her finish the part and then we'll take comment?

The last decision point is currently we use an application work group.

And so for many years, we used a set of four to six individuals.

It was community-based.

So we had two or three individuals from the public, and we had two or three subject matter experts from the city, and that was the group that kind of sat and looked at all the awards and discussed yes and nays for recommendation, and then we'd bring those recommendations to the board.

Last year we did more of an internal application review work group, which was about four to six subject subject matter experts that worked in the city.

So the health department was involved, finance was involved, our grants expert, Yassenia Petinko, who's here today, was also involved.

She runs the program.

So again, there's different ways we can do this.

You know, um many many years ago, the board we brought the applications directly to the board, and you guys made the decision.

However, things come up during making those decisions that maybe shouldn't be in an open meeting.

Um I'll leave it at that.

Um, and so I think it was decided, plus it makes it a very long meeting when you're getting um you know presentations from each nonprofit about how they want to spend the money.

And so they decided to start to use the application work group.

And so we've kind of been doing that for several years.

So again, up to you guys how you want to move forward with this process as well.

So this is just the three discussion points that I'm asking for some guidance on.

Um basically the future of the grant.

Do we want to continue to do grants or do a public-private partnership or a combination of the three?

Um, do we want how do we what day what data do you want from me?

I'm happy to provide whatever you'd like.

And then you know, how would you like us to do the application process?

Do you want me to bring it directly to you?

Continue with the application work group, internal, external.

Okay.

Uh Supervisor Shiny, you have a public comment or thought.

I I do, so I'll I guess I'll just um a discussion, and it doesn't have to be answered at the moment, but maybe as we have these conversations.

So on the future of continuing the grant as is or changing to private public partnership, what are the pros and cons of each for and then I can just throw them all and then we can data gathering, how the board would like to receive the collective data.

I think it's very helpful to know how the money was spent and you know on what kinds of programs because that helps me have a better understanding of each organization and the services they provide, uh, but I'll end to kind of see if there's overlap and what kinds of overlap, because sometimes you you need that, sometimes you don't.

It's a repetition of services that get you know, we don't have to have an overkill on that.

Um then it helps in determining what the next step would be or what the most proper funding would be, and then with the um the application process, I absolutely support a work group, and I was just curious on the um why would it be taken just in-house for the the experts is you know, I think there is a benefit to having public input, but of course you want that expertise as well.

So those are my thoughts.

So I think that I don't know, but I might be the longest rating on working on this particular thing because Supervisor Von Gowski and I worked years and years and years ago when we were establishing the percentages and competitive versus non-competitive.

So I'd like to discuss really where I think we've um say this right.

So you have two thought processes, right?

For me, I have statutory responsibility in NRS 428 that says I have to supply certain things within the public realm that we have a responsibility to do as a board, and I think for me, what I see is that has really morphed into providing more than what we're statutorily required to do, and I think all of the nonprofits do an absolutely tremendous job, and they fill needs that might be there for our residents, but they're not necessarily um required by the statute that we do.

And so when I look at being at the duciary of the taxpayers' money, I want to make sure that we're applying it to what we're to what the statute requires us to.

Not that we can't do more, but I feel the funds are so limited, and then the other issue for me putting it, but I want the bang for the dollar too, right?

I want to be able to see a result.

I want to be able to see that we're moving the needle, and I think we've gotten away from that over time.

And so I I don't like the grant process in one respect where we're just putting out, oh hey, all you out there in the ethos, what can you do to provide service in Carson City?

I think it should be the opposite that we're putting out a request, and we're much more specific on what our gaps are or on what the statute requires us to supply.

And so do I care in the end whether it's a grant or a contract?

No, I'm more interested in are we delivering the actual services that we as the community need to fulfill NRS 428 or to fulfill what we do with all of those health surveys, and what I see is all this work we do with all of these plans and community health things, and then I don't see us then drill in and focus it.

And I think it fits backwards to the strategic plan too that we really need to tie it all in because if the health department's doing all of these different reports, the hospital, the this, the that, I don't see us tying it in so that we know at the end of the five years we're trying to get what result, and so I'd be super excited if we could work in that arena.

Um I don't care uh one way or the other on who's evaluating.

Um I guess I'll ask the question a different way.

When we open bids for anything that we put out, are we bringing a member of the public in to look at that bid?

I don't think Carol here.

Just the contractors, yeah, that are bidding on it.

Right.

I mean, I'm just saying, so I don't see a need, because part of the problem with bringing in people from the public in to determine your government service, they already to me participated in the plans, and then all of that stuff and all the work groups that we have.

So hopefully we're already developing what the community sees as needs, and we're working on our landscape that we're going to be putting.

So I I just think we're not focusing on results or on just more.

Well, and let me let me let me make sure I'm understanding you.

So when you and Brad Bonkowski set these set up this program, um there were priorities in there, and we've kind of just been running with the same priorities year over year over year.

There wasn't really a method to go back and assess them.

And so um, so I agree that there may be you know, every time there's a needs assessment, we have to reset those priorities to make sure that they're still in line with what the city needs, correct?

And that they they need to be more specific.

I think again, I think Brad and I took a great shot at some overall ones, but now that we're doing all this report and all this gathering of information, we have so much more data that we as a board could drill better.

Right.

So let me just say I I being broad and saying uh mental health services.

Well, maybe we want to be more specific to say no, these four or five types of mental health service we want to target because when you're so broad, I just don't think we're moving the needle.

I don't I don't think we're putting the dollars.

I I agree, and yet that is also a tough one because as you were speaking, um, what came to mind for me were was how do services that aren't required by statute helping us better meet the services that are required, you know.

It's that I'll I'll give an example from the Cassie Critter fixer.

We provide spay and neuter to pets of low-income families who otherwise can't afford spay neuter, what is the impact to the community?

Fewer animals are surrendered to the shelter that directly impacts the services that the city is required to do.

So I a hundred percent agree, but I think it's really important that we don't lose sight of those services that aren't statutorily required, but still have a direct impact on the final app.

I think I see what you're saying, but are if I only have $500,000.

That's that's really the issue, right?

And so what am I as the government?

And I think it's everything that we talk about.

What is our job as the government to supply versus foundations and I think it can help lead the dialogue, which for the brickwork?

I don't think these organizations are going to fold if they don't get our tiny bit of grant money.

I don't see that happening.

I think they have a mission and they're gonna follow through with their mission and find a way to support it.

There's no doubt in my mind, they'll do that.

They're great people, they're goal-oriented, they're gonna get it done.

I think we need to look at what's required of us to do.

But it gives us a little more control over how that money is being utilized and what we're getting towards as an organization.

So that's that's why I'm asking.

And I I think it's time early to done this for a long time, and we need to change it a little bit.

There's there are other things we can focus that's on.

So this goes back to a first question.

I'm sorry, Lisa, she had asked vendor versus versus or contract versus grant.

So I wanted to just um, you know, the the organizations that we're um doing these projects with, they are determining who to give the money to, the eligibility of the individuals.

And so it's um typically a grant when we don't control that.

When they're they're controlling who they're giving um the money to.

Um secondarily, with a grant, um, we can go in and audit at any time, we can do desk reviews and make sure that they are following our program.

We have an MOU that spells out everything we expect.

So it is actually more controlled than a contract.

But there are some like meals for wheels that we know their system, we are their system, so maybe we don't need a grant, and maybe we do a contract.

So I think we can do a combination of the two if that's based on the appropriateness of the service itself that we're asking for.

Right.

Right.

Because a positive about a grant and uh is that nonprofit is the expert in terms of who needs A B and C.

Right kind of that.

So they're supposed to be doing that eligibility testing, so we go in once a year or do a desk review and do an actual audit or a desk review to make sure they actually are following those eligibility guidelines.

Thank you.

Maurice, you had a yeah, uh absolutely focus on the statutory requirements and in my mind, pigeonhole uh that effort towards what boils up in uh those assessment surveys, right?

Where's the highest need is where what we need to address the application process for me?

I I feel like staff should have the latitude to create a system uh that gives them the easiest path to putting the money on the street, uh keeping a very close eye on uh conflict of interest situations, and you know, we talk about bringing in subject matter experts, uh oftentimes those subject matter experts are just that expert because they have a direct connection to the people they're going to be talking about granting or contracting money to.

We have to avoid that conflict of interest.

Um the data uh reporting absolutely the data uh reporting needs to be done, um, but don't create a system where they're spending the majority of the money on admin and not putting it on the street.

It has to be slick, easy, no must, no fuss kind of reporting.

You know, that gets us here.

So that we stay in line that the governor doesn't throw us all in jail, but gets the job done.

I'll tell you as uh the application work group, if you are a part of that, you cannot apply for the grant.

Well, if you apply for the grant sharing, of course, of course.

We're a small city in the city that doesn't know the application.

Of course, that's why there's four to six people on the application review work group.

I think that the I think there's enough in the health department, the finance department, go grab somebody from another department.

I think that we stop the appearance of impropriety.

Doesn't mean it's there, like you said.

I wasn't implying.

Right, it's not there, but let's not even go down that path.

That's that's one of the paramount things that I pay attention to, you know.

I tell people I don't have anything in this world except my integrity.

We all should work on making sure our integrity, integrity is the first thing that enters the room when we go somewhere.

Yes.

No, I know I I'm I'm gonna wait until we're done with our questions, and then I always go and for some public application review work group, we did use somebody from public works, right?

And health and finance.

Yeah, I'm saying it's all I like the idea of actually taking one non-subject matter expert because that's a reality check.

Yes, right.

That's the person that's not intricately involved that can just look as it well.

I don't make any sense.

Well, wait a minute.

Well, you might have a point there.

Looking at it through different different set of lens.

Usually it's your best questions from the person that's not an expert.

Right.

The other thing I we were throwing around as an idea was potentially having um one of you be on the application review work group and kind of rotating through each year having one of you help participate either way.

Um just very clear on who can and who can't apply.

You know, and that that the um eligibility is very tied to the services that through statute we must provide.

That'll be okay, Dan.

Yes.

Um let me take a little bit of public comment and then we'll come back into the data gathering part too in case we want to throw that around a bit.

Um thank you.

Um I just have some statistics and some comments to Hollywald with uh county's RSPP.

You have to speak up.

Yeah, to speak up.

Okay, uh teacher voice.

Let me take a wrap.

Um, that's right.

Um, yeah.

So Molly Wall with the Matteral County's RSVP.

We provide uh programs for seniors and adults with disabilities.

I said this once and I'll say it again.

Our seniors are the forgotten generation, and so we they're not out there, they're not taking your surveys because they don't have the computers, and so today I have with me as well.

Our program director, Melissa Connors, if you have any questions about the numbers and whatever else.

Um in all honesty, I did not in my lifetime, I did not believe that I would be brought to a nonprofit.

I work for government entities all my life.

I go home emotionally spent almost every day.

And why?

Even we haven't had transportation all week because of the weather, but our phones have been ringing non-stop.

And why they want to know somebody's there, somebody is answering.

They are isolated, socially isolated, and they are alone.

So I'm here to tell you that I know the funding we won't fold without your 15,000.

We get 15,000 non-competitive.

This year we got 13,929.

$13,962 for the competitive.

How that helps us is getting those grants.

ADSD, which is aging and disability, they want to know that our communities in which we where we are are supporting us.

It helps us with our foundation money.

We get foundation money through Pennington Smith Foundation, and the first one of the questions they ask, not the first question, but one of the questions they ask are are you getting community support?

So the community support that we do get stays in the community.

Jamie, or uh yeah, to vouch for that because it's right there.

We have all of our numbers.

You can vouch for that as well.

All of our numbers stay in the community in which we are.

We're built in to budget in most of the communities in which we are.

It's just part of the budget.

That helps us get the grants that we need.

We are 86% grant funded.

But just for an idea, there's also an NRS that we provide.

Uh so NRS 422.3962, which is the homemaker service.

That is by statute.

We provide that service in Carson City.

Nine, life time, Winnemucca, and Elco.

What that is is it's a homemaker service.

We provide direct services that go into the homes of our seniors and uh provides them with uh light housekeeping.

Last year we did 1,992 hours here just in Carson City for 30 clients with independent contractors at 20 an hour.

You get a bigger bang for your butt going through us.

Lying County, they do it themselves.

They hire a third-party three actually, three third-party cleaning companies that then go in.

They charge the county 28 per hour and only pay their independent or their cleaners $16 an hour.

We do 20 directly goes to them.

Lincoln, Lincoln County, the county does it.

They then hire government employees.

They have to do benefits, so they can do less with what money they they get from ADSD.

So we do get money through ADSD, but in our grant application, we're able to say the matching funds for that program in Carson City, we get support from them, and that's how we do it.

Your money that you give to us is primarily for transportation.

The transportation that we provide, we have our fleet vehicles, and then we have those who do our personal vehicles as well.

That transportation money or our transportation program helped Molly.

I'm sorry, you've reached your three.

Three of it then over here.

Okay.

So I'm Lisa Connors, and I am a program director with RSEP.

And so going on to our transportation program.

So we're pretty unique with what we do in transportation because we're able to take clients to the specialists that we know from Carson City, which Jack can't do.

We take clients from Douglas, which I know we're not focusing on that, but we're able to cross those county lines and get our seniors to appointments that are vital for their help when they need to go to Remo.

And I don't know how many times we go to radio each month, but we provide over 2,023 and a half hours of transportation to our semester.

I want to try and help you here a little bit because your time is so limited.

Would you speak to the items on whether you think it should be competitive grants, non-competitive, should it be grants, should it be contract, should it not what you provide?

Right.

So what do you think?

Grants allows us to put the money where we need to put it.

And we know where we need to put it because we are the expert in what we're doing in our realm.

And so a grant allows us to share with everything that we're doing, and um allows us the flexibility to spend it where we need to.

So you prefer grant versus contract.

That's all right.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

And yeah, 30 seconds you can still add, but okay.

That's I'm I'm trying to get you to help me answer the questions.

Okay, uh, Mr.

French.

There they're looking at this up and we get one of six of the pages in on page three or six months.

Um what hasn't been brought up is the possibility of shutting down the former.

And that's on your own.

Yeah, it's an option and brought it up and it's been sort of screwed around a little bit.

But I'd like to also say that slowly over the time reported of the board on this data was removed from the finance presentations.

Well, is there a consideration of putting it back into that realm?

Uh that's on page three of these uh gathering credit process uh ordered for the work getting on to the uh presentation.

Is that on there now?

Is that how they do it?

We're gonna I said we were gonna do that next.

I'm sorry.

I thought it was eye following this with most part.

Yeah, we're speaking to it.

I said we would speak to that next after we do this part.

Well, that's a yeah, I just suggested you're asking us to do check or you all too.

Thank you.

I'll try not to sound like I'm yelling at you.

So don't I'm not yelling at you, I'm just speaking up.

Okay.

Um I think I'm okay with so I'm gonna say a little bit different.

I don't think a grant is you can use it wherever you want.

And I and I'm not sure now if you're saying that if we give it to you as a grant, it helps you use it as match or as that's a different answer, but you can't use it wherever you want.

Because you know best how to use the money.

It no, the grant would be specific to what to what program or service we're asking for to be met.

Um I opposed to like I said, I said right up front, I don't care if it's a contract or a grant.

I think that on our side of the ledger, it changes the way we do accounting.

What's the beings that we have to do, what federal rules come into play, and so I don't uh I don't know that just because I make it a grant, it's not federal money that I am dispersing, therefore I don't know that the federal uniform guide for grants actually comes into play.

It does not.

We've always um we've always tried to keep it to that higher standard though.

Right.

But I'm just saying what I what I want to do is a little bit of what Supervisor White said.

I want to get the money to the street, and I want to require the minimum amount of administration for the providers that gives me the information to validate that they're providing the service.

That's the most important thing to me, and that's the data element that I think we're missing, and that we struggle.

Lisa and I have been working for quite a while with Jeannie and her group and a bunch from the community, is I need to know we're making a difference with the money.

I don't want to just keep putting out that money, and I'm not seeing any, I get nothing.

I get no reports.

It's like, well, wait a minute.

How many?

And so I think we're working extremely hard as a team to come up with some of that.

And I see it dovetailing when we get the landscape done.

And I think that's the other big piece in here we keep missing is I feel like we're duplicating that.

Many of our service providers see some of the same clients, and the client can shop to a different provider to get some services.

Um probably Molly's RSVP has a unique one that the rest don't have, which is the transportation component.

Um Fish does the dental component that no one else except for now.

Well, he still works for them, but it doesn't matter.

I think they're doing youth dental.

Um, and I think that's what I'm after is being able to target our dollars to these true needs in the community that fit the statute, and then we can see it where it comes back and says, okay, there were um 42 individuals that received dental care.

I don't think we've even ever seen the number of how many dental care we've had.

I mean, we get that information quarterly.

I can send it, I can send an email quarterly, I can do it right before the annual recommendation for the future year.

I can give you what we did in the past.

Um I'm happy to do it anyway.

I don't I don't know exactly how it fell off.

I wasn't in charge of the program back then, but somehow it just got less and less reporting and fell off in trying.

Transitions.

So I don't want to throw, I'm not throwing anybody under the bus.

I'm just trying to, you know, figure out where we want to go going forward.

How often should you think we should have a report on the activities of them?

Annually, semi-annually, are they drawing the money monthly?

I think it should come right in the middle of our budget process.

The awards do come right in the middle.

So I I think twice a year.

Uh and I twice minimum.

But I think twice a year would be adequate.

Okay.

And I also kind of back to the services we have to provide.

I think Molly brought up a really important point in terms of the match and how match helps actually the service more services with a smaller amount of money.

Um so I so appreciate this conversation because it brings to light the nuances of how these this money can be used.

So let me ask, just in general.

So I think we should have specific identified services that were asking to be provided.

I don't want to do open-ended, you tell me what you can provide.

So I want to go the opposite direction.

So I think we've done a great job.

So we could say, for instance, we're gonna have a one-month window of time for those that are interested in applying that can do transportation to doctor's appointments.

I'm just using these as examples, right?

That can provide dental care that can provide what whatever's coming up in our reports and all of our stuff is and maybe mental health, but maybe again a targeted mental health.

Um, and that we put those out and let them then apply, but that we give them maybe a three-year, I'm just talking up obviously what you guys think, a three year program so that the dollars are getting on the street and they have time to make the difference.

I want to see, right?

And that we take some of that administrative work of keep applying and applying, and every year you're back to the same people.

Yeah, we want to minimize that.

So I'm just thinking out loud, we had five year non-competitives, and I'm more than happy to listen to the public, but maybe three years is a good answer that we could settle on that we would because by year two, if we don't see progress or it's not working, I I don't want to maybe give them a five anymore because of work, that's too long to not have to die.

Three more reasonable and that cuts a whole entire term of exciting supervisor for even having any play in it.

If we did five, so three's better.

I think that three's better.

How about but it also, yeah, and and I think three can work because some see if something works, sometimes it takes a little bit longer, and so I think it's really important that programs have enough time to be effective and to build um the process that is needed to actually be able to meet the objective.

And then one other thing in them that I've seen over the my 11 years of practicing on a community service stuff.

I see our hesitation as both staff and even us.

I I'll just put us all in this vote.

If I've given a grant to an entity, $10,000, we'll just keep this simple.

They're in halfway through and say, oh, my idea isn't working.

They want to come in and amend their grant to get to do something else.

I'm not interested in doing that.

I don't think it's fair to everyone else that applied and went to their programs, they said they could do it.

I think we have to hold people accountable to what they said they were gonna do.

And so I I just throw that out as a discussion point.

I I think you have to take that in a case by case uh situation.

I mean, you know, I I think in three years, you have a pretty good idea whether it's gonna work or not.

And there are times very short term.

This is a flop.

And I'm not opposed to listening to somebody that says my idea is a wash, but I think I have a way to fix it rather than just wash out the whole thing.

Well, but we could put it back out.

What I what I'm indicating is I'm giving the individual control of that money instead of our original purpose and putting it back out.

So the 10,000 could be or 5,000, maybe they've already spent five.

Bring the five back in, and what I'm saying is it can go back out to the go back out on the street to say, okay, we didn't get eds.

Maybe we want to add that 5,000 to rental.

I'm assuming rental assistance will be on our list of uh stuff because we're really working in the housing that I saw even in the strategic plan.

But that's all I'm saying is that I don't want the control to be staff and the individual.

It's got to come back.

Well, it's got to come back to us because we make that decision, that's fine.

But uh I would be interested in giving somebody a chance to make an adjustment and to a completely new program.

No, I didn't say that.

Oh, that's what I've done.

My program is a wash, but I have an idea how to fix it.

That's not a new program.

Okay.

Fix what I grant that it's not working.

But the same same end result, two different things.

We we let people change the program.

The how part I agree with you.

Yes.

Two different things.

Uh my idea of giving everybody shoe just simply isn't gonna work.

Well, then okay, give me the money back and we'll do something else with it.

Right.

Okay.

I'm just that's I got you.

We've got to stay within the grant parameter of what the original shift to fix.

Right.

The delivery method is one thing, and a result same.

And I believe in our policy, we allow them to shift 10% around their original budget items to use the money, but if they go above that, we have to bring it to the board.

That's pretty standard in a grant arena type stuff.

Right.

Umswell.

I just want to make a comment on the data gathering and the grant reporting.

If you shift it a little bit more towards non-merrative and more what uh Genie requires of us, we give her numbers, just flat out statistics is what we give her every month.

And then for the CSS, we do the quarterly, but it's a lot of narrative.

We give you the numbers within the narrative, it might be easier to report to them to just our statistics like that.

Yeah.

Um, how we do it for uh the health and human services really works.

Okay.

And so we have we have multiple.

Yeah, well, we're happy to work with Genie.

We have multiple reports that somehow they're reporting things to you.

It's different funding mechanism.

It's a different funding mechanism.

And you're saying, let me say it differently, in some federal grants that you monitor or hand out money, they're giving you reports.

Yes, because when we put the application forward, when we put that application for the funding to come to us before it's awarded, we have to dictate what data we're going to report to reflect success in that program.

And so I think that that becomes really important in any application that we would request.

What data are you going to provide that shows the movement of that needle?

Keeping in mind that sometimes the movement of the needle is maintaining the needle where it's at and not having it become a bigger issue on the problem, right?

So sometimes that movement is to maintain, and that's a really good place to be too.

So I think that in the application, just like we have to do for all of our federal grants, when we build that scope of work, we also identify what data we're going to provide on a regular basis.

And the acceptance of our application is deemed when they agree to that, they agree to that the data is that we're going to provide.

So I think that that should become part of the process that we're doing associated with that.

No, I I really like that because anything we can do for consistency and ease of reporting and things like that, we should do.

I think all of our nonprofits are capable of telling us the story, but I I need the data, which is what we've been asking for what we've been asking for, and we in the committee that have been looking at everything.

What we've been asking for, and we in the committee that have been looking at everything.

So I'm wonderful if you're changing the monthly or quarterly report to be some agreed upon, like you said, these are the four data elements.

You're gonna give me the 19 trips, or we didn't know.

I think it makes sense phone call.

To be part of the MOU from their application, what they're gonna provide, we put in the MOU, and then that's the data that they'd report on.

So I mean, because each one's different, right?

Some are food banks, some are transportation, some are, yeah.

But all of them should have a client number attached to them, all of them.

Agreed.

Agreed.

Right.

So I think that's probably good.

Did Jenny, did you have something you wanted to say?

But thank you very much.

And I just want to say that uh the honor.

I have the honor of being involved here or as we can for all.

And some of their activities I have no idea about, and the people that I met were amazing that we're uh providing those services, and that I would probably find it in thank you.

So that's just a problem.

Okay.

Um so I think we pretty much answer what let's kind of review where we're sitting.

So we want to provide the statutory ones, and we want to be specific on what we're asking to be supplied, not a general you tell us what you can do.

We want to use our I think like the old priorities.

I think we're going to bring um ours at the same time.

Jeannie brings her needs assessment so we can see that that is incorporated into priorities, but also the statutory requirements, our priorities.

Perfect.

So you guys can approve the priorities before we go out and look for those to supply them.

Right.

Uh the data gathering we just discussed will be data points, um, similar to what we do to report to the feds when we get money, and that it'll be an internal application group for a review.

Okay, and do you want um quarterly reports from me on the data?

Or twice a year.

Twice a year good enough.

Twice a year, okay.

Twice a year is good enough.

Okay, okay.

Is there uh anything else that anybody on the public wanted to comment in because the only thing we didn't go over?

Is there anyone that thinks we just should not do it?

I mean, it is a it's an honest discussion point.

So the first thing is we have a statutory requirement, but do the the discussion is whether we do it all in house with that dollar, or we are putting it some out on the street.

Why do I like personally putting some on the street?

But what I want to indicate is if the need is us in when we get done with the identifying, and that's why it's important that that happens first so that we can design how much we're putting on the street versus how much we're doing in our welfare account with our own money.

Um so I'm okay with putting some on the street because I like that they can use it as match and grow those dollars, but I I want to make it quite clear that I'm also okay that if let's say we were gonna hire a mental health counselor for youth or something, and it was gonna reside in Genie's office.

I'm also okay with us supplying a service and having that fund pay for it versus the general fund, and so I I think that the most important thing we can do is get the analysis and the gaps, and then we're picking those few things that we want to concentrate on.

And so I'm suggesting you may have a combination.

So I don't want to set you a magic number yet until we get that report and we look at it and say, okay, community, community, city, community, you know, who's supplying what, so then we can determine the dollar amount to put out on the street for you to distribute.

Does that make sense?

Okay, all right.

You got all that you need?

I do.

Oh, wait, for five.

Yeah, just comment comment.

I appreciate what would you both comment on that?

You know, experts are obviously they have their interests, and that is great, and that's fine, and we shouldn't be advocating for those, but I do believe it was very important that you said an outside view.

A very unbiased totally somebody not involved brings a lot to it as well.

So I think that's important.

Thank you.

Um, we did.

Thank you.

I really appreciate all your okay.

We are going to take a break and we'll come back about 10 twenty.

It's gonna be about ten minutes ahead of schedule, but I want to stay as close as I can in case people wanted to come for the short term rentals.

So we're in recess.

But I want to make sure that it's one there.

Yeah, but I'm far away from the show.

No, it's gonna be equal.

They gave us an hour and a half.

One, two, three, four, five, six.

I've got six people in the audience for me.

I got everything represented, real person.

Um, it's like the realtor guy says to me when it's a high life.

So you're gonna go.

I'm like, I've noticed that.

I think we do our own thing.

I have not reported by the same.

Our stuff is organic.

I think this is me.

I'll just like it.

I thought there was an extra chair.

Oh, you're all pulling this chair.

Maybe just kind of sit here.

Wait, are you gonna block me though from the board?

Oh, my boss is a good idea.

Why do you stay in your seat and that would be a little bit more?

I'll just stay in the street.

Are you sure?

This is gonna take like twenty to thirty minutes.

Oh, okay.

All right, well that case I will see.

Because we got six people in the public too on that.

So they'll want to talk about the argument, but I don't think.

Well, and my part is gonna be pretty short, because it'll be like, well, I mean the words kind of say what they know.

Well, the big thing for you, I think, is gonna be penalties.

Because right now for Title 4, we're going to 1.08.10, which is a misdemeanor.

If we use title eighteen, we're going to the news and which is title A, which is recording NOB, administrative citation finds and names.

Well, I just remember technically any violations C CMC is a misdemeanor.

Right.

Because we go back to C CMC 1.08.

Which is why in the past we're like a nuisance line.

Exactly, we like that.

So it's not one or two.

But that whole thing in Title A, what eighteen takes you to eight, which mayor hates, we know that is.

I'm gonna go hard on title eighteen.

I'm letting you know I'm going hard on eighteen.

You're late.

I'm trying to do close to 10 30 because we published it that way in case there was public that's going to slide.

Okay, I know.

No, I don't want somebody walking in.

Some of it I can start with someone came in and 1030s.

Sure, sure.

Okay, my goodness.

See, I have this great hammer.

So are we ready to uh report yet?

Thank you.

So I'm going to bring the board of supervisors back to order.

We're now on agenda item 5C.

Um discussion of possible action regarding some potential policy and ordinance drafting directives for the regulation of short-term rentals.

Ms.

Solman, will you give a presentation, please?

Yes, I will.

Thank you.

Hope Sullivan, Director of Economic and Community Development.

And I just want to mention before I launch into it, you have six people in the audience who came to the listening tours.

We have three residents.

We have Sean who's representing the realtors.

We have Bretton who's representing Airbnb, and we have Chris Kitt who's representing Visa Carson City.

And I mentioned that because sort of the origin or the foundation of my presentation is really from your meeting of December 4th, coupled with the input that I received at the listening sessions.

Now, Chris Kip, am I loud enough?

Okay.

So December 4th.

The board, what you said is look at it.

The code's not clear.

That's not fair to our residents.

It's not fair to our property owners.

The code doesn't talk about short-term rentals.

And we know we have short-term rentals.

We know they exist in the United States.

We know they exist in Carson City.

So let's amend the code so that we acknowledge them.

We know where they'll be.

And let's figure out what standards, if any, we should assign to this.

So that's where we started on December 4th.

You then told me to go have a couple of listening sessions.

You said just two would be okay.

So that's why I did.

So we did those listening sessions.

At the first one, we had 17 people.

Supervisor Shooty came to our first one, Supervisor Geomi came to the second one.

And we also received five written comments.

In terms of um jumping right into procedural due process, because how do we handle these from a procedural due process perspective?

And then I'm going to get into the substance of potential standards.

But in looking at this, what I was thinking after hearing everything is to use what's called the administrative permit.

And you talked about that a tiny bit when you were talking about Darren Berger's amendment.

And we don't talk about the administrative permit a lot.

Because it's easy.

But it's not super easy.

So it's not an over-the-counter permit.

Right now, in Title 1804, you have this title table of permitted uses.

So when we talk about land use, we go to our zoning ordinance, right?

And when we talk about land use, I always like to say we have three choices.

Yes, no, and maybe.

Is the use allowed?

Yes, it is.

You can build a garage at your house.

You only need special permission, go get building permit.

Um can you build a factory in the residential zoning district?

No, you can't.

There's nothing to talk about.

And then we have these maybes.

In Carson City, when we have maybes, like can I build a church in a residential zoning district?

Maybe.

It's a special use permit or an administrative permit.

The administrative permit, and this is all in the table of permitted uses.

So when you look at your table of permitted uses, it's just a big matrix.

And on the far left side of that matrix are all the uses.

So what's not listed right now is the use called short-term rental.

What would happen is we would add to that matrix of uses, short-term rental.

Then I wouldn't have to interpret and say, oh, it's like a hotel.

It would be stated.

Then when you look at that table of permitted uses, each row, I'm sorry, each column is a zoning district.

And you have four things, one four things can be in that box.

Either P, which means it's permitted, go get a building permit.

An A, which means it's subject to an administrative permit, and I'm gonna talk a little more about that.

An S, which means it's subject to a special use permit, you all know what that is, or it's blank, which means it's not allowed.

The administrative permit is subject to approval by the hearings officer.

Heather Ferris and I are both hearings officers.

NRS 278263 identifies the qualifications for a hearings officer.

So we already have that process, we have that whole system, everything's set up.

We do notification to neighbors when we do an administrative hearing.

We have to make the findings of fact, the same as the special use permit, but doesn't go to the planning commission.

The hearings officer has that authority.

The positive thing about the administrative permit is, and I was joking with Brianna a little bit just during the break, because Brianna used to cover our liquor hearings, and I'm gonna use the liquor hearing as an example.

During the liquor hearings, and again I'm the hearings officer, as is Heather Ferris for a liquor hearing.

We engage with the business owner who's looking for the for the liquor license, and there's a lot of engagement, or and we always are just really clear.

You can't serve to minors, you have to do server training, but it gives us a chance to have FaceTime with them.

It also means that we've done some research on what they're seeking to do.

There's a staff report, and health departments looked at it, and someone else has looked at it.

Who's my oh sheriff's office has looked at it?

And so we've routed this application.

We've gotten input from departments we need to get input from, and so similarly in the case of the administrative permit, when that application comes in, we'd route it to fire, we'd route it to health, we'd route it to the different departments that we want input from, and the the planner would go to the site, visit the site, and that's gonna be important in a little bit.

The planner would write the report using all the input from these other departments, and it would go to the hearings officer for a decision.

Um still on my notes here.

So that's I so that's why I'm recommending the administrative hearing because I think it's too important for an over-the-counter permit.

In over-the-counter permit, there's no engagement.

Special use permits probably too much, doesn't have to go to the planning commission.

So I think we can allow the hearings officer to handle all of these.

Once the administrative permit is issued, and it may be issued with conditions, but once it is issued, the applicant or the property owner can seek the business license.

And it's interesting because earlier this week we had a meeting with the health department, and when the health department asked for the meeting, I think they thought we were going to talk about business license, and we were actually talking about planning.

And sometimes the Title 18 and Title 4 get confused.

So I'm using both.

So I just talked to you about the procedural due process in Title 18.

Again, we have that matrix, and oh I forgot to tell you one thing about the matrix, and Supervisor Shubia, I'm looking at you because this was your input when we updated Title 18.

Certain uses have supplemental standards, and supervisor shooty said, Well, how will they know?

Like, how does the public know if there's a supplemental standard?

That's a good question.

So, in that matrix on the far left of next to the use, there's a check if there's a supplemental standard, and then you know to go into division one of the Title 18 appendix to look for your supplemental standards.

So that's all zoning, but now we're switching to business license.

Let me see where I am on this.

Okay, I'm still good.

Okay, so once you're allowed to apply for the business license, and again, I should mention the administrative permit costs 750.

That's an existing fee, it's in the code.

We're not creating anything.

Business license, I'm gonna suggest we create a new category for the business license called short-term rental.

We have like seven categories right now, so we'd be adding an eighth category.

I'm suggesting a fee of $500 annually.

So you get your entitlement with the administrative permit, that should be a one-shot deal.

The business license is renewed annually, so it's $500 every year.

The business license is my first business license part of the $750.

No.

So the very first time I have to pay $12.50.

Yes.

So that would be to establish.

So the $500 for business license would be annual.

And that would be every the first year you'd pay the $25 application fee as well for the business license, but that's only one time.

Business licenses are not transferable.

So I'm suggesting a new category of business license called short-term rental with an annual fee of $500.

The short-term rental does not include if you rent a room in your house.

So if you're an empty nester, you have an extra room, you want to rent it to somebody, it's not short-term rental.

That's still a single family home.

We're only looking if the short if somebody is renting the dwelling.

So potential time frame.

So if we were to really fast track this, I'm not going to go into it because you can go back to the PowerPoint, but we would be implementing around July 7th because you had asked back in December for a 60-day grace period to get to communicate with the community to do the permitting, things like that.

So that would be the absolute quickest we could go.

Sherry was able to pull together the numbers and the total cost to the city to increase from 1.5 to 2 is $82,493.

To capture this cost, we would need $165 short-term rentals.

We don't have $165 short-term rentals.

I'm anticipating we'll have about 40 short-term rentals, which is only a revenue of about $20,000.

I had my staff go into onto Airbnb to look at what Airbnb is advertising right now.

It was too hard to do vacation rental by owner because you have to put dates in.

So right now on Airbnb, what my staff found was 43 houses, one apartment, three townhouses, and six accessory dwelling units.

So that's you know, 50 something.

I'm thinking once we start charging fees, some people may opt out of the program.

So I'm thinking 40.

By way of comparison, Douglas County has over 550.

So they have a big program.

We're not going to have a really big program.

So if we were to go to two compliance officers, what do we do with this person?

And in fact, I just talked yesterday to Ernie over at Douglas County because I wanted him to review my slides with me and kind of give me input from his perspective.

He told me he's got two FTEs for compliance up there doing nothing but vacation rental.

They're paid out of the vacation rental.

He can't keep them busy enough with 550 units because people are in compliance.

Could we contract with Douglas County to take up their slack time?

Um interesting idea.

Their focus is very, very different from ours, and we'll talk about that in a little bit.

Their focus is heavily on parking.

I don't see that being a real big focus for us.

So what would we do with our 0.5 person?

Um right now, the compliance officers are responsible for business license enforcement.

So if we have folks who are operating businesses and they don't have a business license, then we they can do that level of enforcement to get people to get business licenses.

They do nuisance enforcement, so they can yeah, they're looking at weeds, litter, things like that.

Um parking enforcement, they they do that, and they do zoning enforcement.

So if you have um illegal uses or any type of zoning violation, so there are other responsibilities assigned to the compliance officer right now today.

That's what they do.

So the short-term rental would be an added function.

In terms of the standards, um, I have four pages of standards for you.

So what I'm proposing, I'm gonna start with what I'm proposing, and I'm gonna tell you why I'm not proposing.

And to a certain extent, that will come into what Douglas does.

Um first was really important, and everyone at the listening sessions agreed.

The applicants have to complete and submit to visit Carson City, the TOT report and stay current.

Something they do in Douglas is at the time of renewal, they have them submit evidence that they paid the TOT.

And I think that's actually a really good mechanism, and you don't get renewal unless you provide that evidence.

It has to be a dwelling, and an accessory dwelling is okay.

And that's the other benefit of the administrative hearing or the administrative permit is the assistant, it's usually the assistant planner will literally physically go out to the site and see where what is this creature that you're planning to rent out as a short-term rental, and they can make sure it's actually a dwelling as opposed to a garage or an RV or something like the shed.

Like it has to be a dwelling.

The other thing, and this will come up in a minute, is the planner when they go out to visit the site prior to the administrative hearing, will verify the bedroom count in the field.

So we're not relying on the assessor's information, we're not relying on what they're telling us.

We're walking into the dwelling and verifying a bedroom count based on our definition of a bedroom.

So if you use your dining room as a bedroom, that's interesting, but it's not a bedroom.

Only one short-term rental per property.

So that will affect apartments.

So if you have an apartment building, somebody has a short-term rental in there, that's one because that's a single address.

We don't want our apartment buildings becoming hotels.

If you want to be a hotel, lawfully become a hotel.

If you have a house and an ADU, pick it.

You get one short-term rental.

And so that that was that's my recommendation.

How would condos fit?

Condos are each their own APM.

So it could be per AP.

Correct.

Correct.

Same same question on due prices and tripods.

Only one.

Just one.

Yep.

Okay.

Oh, I should actually I'm glad you just said that because I I meant to mention and I wasn't paying close attention to my notes.

Um, on the dollar amount.

I did do a call in Brett Scalari set up the call with um representatives from Airbnb.

The folks from Airbnb thought the dollar amount was too high.

They said, our we have some folks who, and this is my word, are light users, and yeah, for you to charge $750, it's that's that's gonna be a lot for them, and they'll that will tempt them to not lawfully get licensed.

My comment to that, and my comment, which I'll say publicly right now, is if you can't afford the $750, you probably shouldn't be in this business.

I don't I think $150 is a reasonable rate of entry without breaking the bank, and if the fee is already there, it already exists.

Anyone seeking an administrative permit pays that fee.

But they don't know.

Well, I want to talk about the $500 because we're well that's gonna be our business license fee, but no, I hear you.

So the couple together.

Yep, that if you get your administrative permit, and that structure matches our entire structure.

So I'm actually in favor of that because I'm not changing the administrative procedure.

Right.

But the business license component, we're making a separate class correct for this.

Category, it's called whatever.

But we're charging it more than the vast majority of businesses in Carson C.

I would I would need to run those numbers because when you get a business license, it's not just the number that's in that visualizing.

Right, exactly.

But other businesses they pay for the square footage, they pay for the number of employees you're right, so there's no employees here.

It's $3.85 base fee.

I'm just suggesting that maybe just the first year the business license maybe could be $250 because you just paid $7.50 to enter into it to begin with.

Whatever the board decides.

Yeah, I just don't know if you want to go down that path now because I don't agree with that.

I mean if you I mean every other business in the community.

If they're paying a permit fee to get the entitlement to do whatever they're gonna do, they have to pay whether it's an SUP or an admin fee, and then they have to turn around and pay the business license fee.

Every other business has to be.

In my call with Ernie, they're they're charging over $2,000.

He felt like $500.

Yes, he felt like $500 was a reasonable amount.

Well, then don't do it.

Okay.

Do you want to stand fees or just stay on standards?

I think we have to discuss them.

I mean, oh, do you want to stop now or do it at the end?

The fees should be in line with whatever else we're doing.

I don't think it's appropriate to set short-term rentals out as red-headed stepchild.

We're going to hire you.

Right.

And I think if we go through the standards, you'll see what standards we're anticipating, so you'll understand the scope of enforcement.

You may not agree with these standards.

And or you may think, yeah, I don't know what you're going to say.

And then I think there can be correlation.

And we might decide.

Okay.

Okay.

Also, and at the listing tours, everyone agreed with this that there should be a responsible person who can respond within 30 minutes.

No events.

And the word event is very deliberate.

There was a lot of discussion about parties, and I said, no, if people want to use the house and have a birthday cake, you know, we're not going to talk about parties, just events.

So you can't have your wedding there, but you can have a party.

Quiet hours.

It sounded like 10 p.m.

to 7 a.m.

And that would be defined as no amplified noise outside.

Where am I?

An annual fire inspection.

And Kevin can speak more specifically to what he would expect that to include.

But what would happen is the business license would be routed to fire, because again, the business license would have certain inspections every year.

They would show us that they're paying the TOT.

And so FIRE would conduct that inspection.

A statement of no conflict with the CCNRs.

And we've talked about that on other items.

Next, an annual inspection.

This is what I envision the compliance officer doing.

Verifying the presence and operation of smoke detectors, carbon monoxide detectors, that fire extinguishers are current and the current tag will not expire before the next inspection or renewal.

So you don't want to have it, okay, it's good for another two weeks, and that's not going to be good.

So you want it to be good till that next renewal.

An information book.

And this kind of came up at the listening sessions.

And this book would include the responsible party contact information.

Information about how to get information if there's an emergency, if there's a wildfire, if there's flooding, where do you get that information in Carson City?

And just general house rules that we would expect them.

It's interesting.

And so if the sheriff has to respond, the first thing the sheriff says is, where's your business license and where's your code of conduct?

And Ernie said he couldn't believe it.

Everyone's posting them and it works.

How can the sheriff enforce a code of conduct?

He's not enforcing it, he's verifying it's posted on the wall next to the business license.

But uh the annual inspection you're set as code enforcement's doing it right now.

What is the fire department inspecting if your guys I I'll have Kevin talk about that?

What I did was I prepared what I anticipated the compliance officers doing first, and then fire indicated they would want an annual inspection as well.

I can tell you right now, I don't think we need both.

We do no reason they have workload with the fire department, and this is not a high uh occurrence uh you know high hazard risk.

Um the code enforcement officer should be able to be trained to look at a tag on the fire extinguisher.

Um I I think it's totally doable.

It certainly could call the fire department if they had a city person.

What's going on here?

Right.

I mean, I think the idea is to minimize the number of people who are cruising through people's tax people's homes, right?

In my opinion, call other people's homes or well, I I get it, I get it.

I get it.

Yeah, but it's like and we're hiring the code enforcement guy to regulate and do the work of the short-term rental, and that can be done by that.

Is it even possible?

I I even I I guess the question for Jeannie is can we can the code person be trained to do the health inspection?

Or is there a law that would prevent that?

Not a best practice along.

Um so the health inspection is gonna be very different than what we do for like a hotel.

It's gonna be more about submitting a plan in order to help maintain the health and well-being of those people who are gonna be staying at the residence.

So it's gonna be an administrative review of that health plan.

Absolutely.

And so it's not we're not gonna be going in to do that.

So, yes, the code enforcement person could do that.

We're gonna ask them to submit the plan.

We'll verify how they're gonna disinfect, sanitize that kind of thing.

But he he or she could be trained to look for what you would look for.

So again, we have one person doing it, not that department and that department and that department.

Yes.

So going back to the information book for a second we can certainly add things to the information book as we feel like these are things that for example the code on vacation rentals once that's established so that the users of that of that facility understand what the expectations are.

Things like that can be in this information book so that everyone has it and they can't say well I didn't know also for the annual inspection backup batteries for smoke and carbon monoxide detectors.

And so that was sort of the scope of what I had identified in in fairness to to fire and health what I did in in working on this was I immediately focused in on what the compliance officer would do and then said to health and fire are you all going to have stuff.

So that's why it seems a little disconnected.

Next would be if there's a swimming pool or a hot tub having making sure those are clean and having um well we had said a health department review of that it's not identical to the review of a hotel swimming pool.

Is that right Jeannie?

That's correct because they regulated different people and we would we would recommend a $75 fee that would be paid what we do right now for a business license say somebody has a business license and they have a swimming pool.

Our business license division collects the health fees at the time of a business license renewal so if there's a swimming pool on the property like a hotel say when they renew their well when we prepare the invoice for for we'll just pick on I don't know any hotel when we prepare that invoice that invoice includes the health fees which also would include any pool inspections that the health department's going to conduct and so we would continue with that practice of collecting the health department fees at the time of business license renewal and the idea would be that at the time of renewal we would collect the $75 fee and I'll let you all decide if this is something the compliance officer can do or if you want the health department doing that.

Compliance stop one stop they're in it all on the checklist.

Next is the occupancy limit.

Okay so there was lots of discussion at the listening sessions I think you all talked about this too about occupancy limit.

And so I'm recommending two people per bedroom based on the bedroom count as determined at the time of the administrative permit.

So the planner when they go somebody applies the planners walking into that house counting the bedrooms and that's what the hearings officer is going to authorize when they authorize the discretionary approval this next one came up at the listening session I thought it was so fascinating.

I think Supervisor Giomi was there when this came up about fire pits.

And they were talking about how a lot of people who come here don't know about our wind and they and they might they might light a fire pit and yeah does that really make sense so I did talk to the fire chief about that and he said he felt like it would be okay if it was gas operated only so all any fire pits will need to be gas operated only.

So the proposed ordinance does have language in there about a wood fire.

Okay and that's a draft ordinance so I think we were waiting to see where you all landed before Dan kind of finalized that.

But no we would definitely want to limit it to gas because it's just people don't understand the wind.

Yeah operates okay well when I saw that I put in my house to require a spark arrest or screen on the fire pit.

Yes we want to limit it to gas.

Yes.

Yeah.

Next I told you the business license is non-transferable the administrative permit per code is transferable so I'm suggesting we make it that for this short term rental that we make it non-transferable just so any new owner continues to have that face time with the hearings officer to understand the rules and the expectations they have to pay yes and again the sanitation and disinfectant infection protocol be required and again if the compliance officer could learn that but we need to we need these places clean we don't want people coming and associating Carson City with bed bugs or something.

So what's not included and this is not in your PowerPoint because some of you may have gone back and listened to the tape and said why didn't she include these things?

Supervisor White we'll start with you.

You wanted a limit on the number how many per person ownership how many people could own a certain number and at the listening sessions what came up was corporate buying and should we stop corporations from owning these I have not recommended any limitation on how many people can own or any limitation on corporate ownership.

Supervisor White, you also brought up back in December having the primary parking in the garage.

I have not made any recommendations on parking.

I feel like if a car is lawfully parked, it's lawfully parked.

That was suggested to help enforce the number of people that show up at the house if we're if we're going to restrict it to uh two people per bedroom.

So that was my suggestion was primary parking in the garage with no more than two vehicles in the driveway.

Four automobiles are going to bring more people than you can legally have in a house anyway.

Unless it's a girl's trip.

Birthday party.

Two people generally travel together.

Actually, it it's interesting.

You asked if we could use Douglas County as enforcement officers.

What they spend most of their time on is parking enforcement.

And what they'll do is they'll literally go to the short-term rental, say open the garage door, because we want proof that you can get a car in there, and you don't have a bunch of stuff in there that's precluding parking in there.

Because parking is so hard up in Tahoe.

And our our atmosphere is just different.

And so I just feel like if a car is lawfully parked, it's lawfully parked.

Uh I I will say nobody in the industry objected to that restriction.

And it's another way to restrict how many people are there.

Okay.

I'm just admitting why it didn't include.

I like legal is legal.

I I don't want code enforcement, the sheriff's office having to argue about a parked car that appears to be legal in its normal sense.

They're not going to know whether it's somebody within that house or the next door neighbor's house.

Right.

They're just going to see a car parked up.

Sure.

Right.

So then it would be a neighbor complaining that that car belongs to someone inside the short.

A legal park is a legal parking, but I don't know.

You want to talk about that administrative permit not being transferable?

Okay.

I think I'd like to talk about it's transferable with like a $250 fee, so they still bring the new owner in to have a face-to-face with you, but I don't want to charge them $7.50 again for the same house that's already been approved.

I hear it.

Whatever the board wants.

Right?

Because that's what you're really after.

Whatever the board wants to do.

I'm just trying to come up with the other idea.

Right.

I'm trying, I'm trying to recoach some cost is what is what I'm trying to do, and to recognize a couple other things I didn't, I just real quick I didn't recommend.

Oh, you want to stay on that at all?

I want to help.

Oh, and I just think another possibility is if somebody sells that people might, but they also might just be moving in to use it as a house and not so only a 250 transfer fee.

So if it's transferable.

Right.

But yet that way it still gives you the hook of training.

It's still subject to an administrative permit, but it's a reduced fee.

Right.

Because I don't want to just keep hitting that same address.

I don't have any problem with the fee.

Right.

Okay.

The 750.

Because it's a new person.

I don't have a problem with the regulatory use.

But we don't do that in any other business.

Again, why are we treating this one, this business owner, as if they're just horrible?

Because we're putting businesses in residential communities.

That's why.

But the objective is to get them before Hope to have a sit down, not to go here.

Do you see a new owner applying as a gouge?

I mean, isn't that owner needing to show that they are and will be in compliance and take on that responsibility?

Well, I think you do your best for the business license every year.

Is the administrative fee transferable in other businesses?

Yes.

Well, it's it's a little different.

Okay, so you didn't bring a code, did you?

The question is if somebody has an SUP.

Yeah.

And they paid 2250 to put a church in a residential case.

And the Catholic Church buys the Mormon church.

And they now is it do they need to get another SUP helped?

Okay.

Usually not.

There are times when a condition is placed on a special use permit, and I actually tend to not like this condition, which I'll explain later.

But a condition is placed on a special use permit that says this special use permit is non-transferable.

And you might think about the case of a daycare center near residential area because that was so contentious to get it approved.

They're like, look at we want to make sure the new owner understands all of the conditions, the sensitivity of it, and so we're going to say this is non-transferable.

That describes it.

But it's not the norm of what we do.

I will give you it's not the norm.

That's not what we do.

And all I'm saying is we're going to send it to it.

No, that was a case-by-case individual one that gained all day cares.

You are correct, it's not all day cares.

The question was is a discretionary approval like a special use permit or an administrative permit.

Those do run with the land, typically.

There are cases where they are declared as non-transferable as a condition of approval due to the sensitivity that the planning commission or the board feels like you know what?

We have to make sure the new owner understands all these rules and understands the sensitivity, so we're going to make this non-transferable.

A liquor license is not transferable.

A liquor license is non-transferable.

So if somebody has a bar, somebody else buys that bar, we have a have it.

We have like feisty goat right now is doing it.

They the new person has to come in, sit with the hearings officer.

We had it with remedies.

Remedies, you know, they I can't remember I'm telling Brianna how many times the remedies come to the liquor hearing.

And it was really important when it was a new owner in the remedy space that we have a very clear communication about expectations.

I think because this is new, and because it is a hot button issue, I say it would make them non-transferable to Starware.

They won't be revisited in the future if this industry proves they're not a problem.

It's a good solution.

Demonstrate compliance and if you have a bunch of jurors, we might run you out of town.

Well, my change your mind the opposite.

Yeah.

There is no more.

No.

So it's a good suggestion.

Okay, other things I have not included to prove I listened.

Um Supervisor White, you wanted decibel meters or suggested decibel meters.

I am not recommending decibel meters.

I am recommending the quiet hours from 10 to 7.

Um Supervisor White and Supervisor Giomi talked about surveillance cameras.

I am not recommending surveillance cameras.

It sounds like a lot of a lot of the owners do utilize cameras for their own own benefit, but I am not recommending that the government mandate cameras.

Again, both of those the industry did not object to.

Thank you.

Um I am also not recommending insurance requirements.

Um I know Todd has done a little bit of research, as has Jeannie regarding the availability of short-term insurance.

Um I think if a property owner chooses to carry insurance, that's their choice.

I'm not recommending that the government mandate the insurance.

And if you have any questions about what how that might benefit the city, I think Todd's prepared to speak to that.

Well, won't their current homeowners insurance might already do some things to them.

It may, it may not, but I feel like that that's for them to understand.

Right.

It doesn't matter to us.

So I say let the insurance industry themselves.

Also at the listening sessions, what came up was having age restrictions.

Douglas County does have an age restriction.

I have not included age restrictions.

25.

Okay, so we're all out.

So now we'll go into penalties because at the meeting in December, you all want to be really clear on what the penalties would be.

So what I'm suggesting for penalties is first, second, third or 500 a day, a thousand a day, revoke the business license.

Three strikes and you're out if you've if you have three violations.

Also in the liquor section in Title Four of the Code, it talks about the ability to suspend the license without prior notice if there are three or more criminal citations issued within a 12-month period.

So I'm recommending similar language be put into the code for short-term rentals, and that the hearings officer has that ability to suspend the license.

So can I ask a couple of questions about that?

Sure.

Um so what what does that look like?

Is that three different parties that parties as a robot?

Noise.

Three different renters of a short-term rental on ABC Street.

One for drugs, one for minor consuming, and one for illegal party.

Then what would happen is Kenny would probably call me and say we have a problem at such and such house, looks like it's a vacation rental, and I'd I'd verify all the information with him, and I would then suspend the license.

So it's the criminal citations that are tied to the address.

That's I guess what I'm giving at.

Yes.

So it's not about the person, it's about the business, if you will.

Okay.

But a long term rental of more than 28 days isn't subject to anything.

It is not, but that said, when we do have criminal activity, it's not unusual for Kenny to reach out and say, hey, what do you have from a regulatory perspective over here that we could use to help address his criminal?

So can we be I guess what I what I want to make sure is that we're applying that consistently, and I worried that there's no feedback method.

So Kenny, is there a way that let's say we do license these businesses?

Is there a way to fly them so that if you hit that third number hope nose in some way?

Yeah, I think I I I'm just saying I don't I mean I like this.

No, and I just want to make sure there's a reporting method to be able to get that back to you.

Right.

So that you can't do it.

A well they're registered with visit Carson City, so they're all registered.

And they'll have a business license that has to be on the city.

It will be posted.

It will be posted in a in a it's per the bus per Title IV, the business license is supposed to be posted in a conspicuous location.

So the sheriff's off and the sheriff's office can usually figure out if it's a short term, or they'll just call me and say, Do you have a short term rental over there?

What have you got going on?

Go ahead.

Yeah, go ahead.

So I don't want to jump out ahead for the other.

I'm just I have two more things and then I'm gonna stop.

I can address that.

Okay.

So and I'm gonna turn over.

I just want to talk about your penalties.

I want to understand what per day means, and what are you talking about?

Okay.

Versus I rent it for a weekend and I'm a bummer renter.

What what do you mean per day?

Okay, because he sold the sold is the guy was only there two days and he's out.

Is he getting charged a thousand dollars because he violated?

Okay, so there are two things.

There's duration and the number of violations.

Right.

Okay.

So let's say that at the end of this whole process when you adopt a uh ordinance, in terms of those standards, you pick 12 things that are standards, and we just went through four pages of standards.

Okay, the person's violated standard number four and standard number three.

That's two violations.

Okay.

So they say they let's just say it's the noise thing and it's the um they have an open flame on wood.

Okay, so those are two different things, those two violations.

Okay, so we go out there, day one, and we see, okay, look at your violating the noise because you're having this all night bonfire, and you're burning wood, and you're only supposed to have a fire with gas.

So you have two violations right there.

This is day one.

So your first is 500, your second is a thousand, we're at 1500 on day one.

That's what I was just wait a minute.

But it was then we come out on day two because you did it again, you didn't listen.

You thought we went away.

And so this would be it would be the next day, we would do it again.

So each day the violation exists is a day.

Because otherwise, what you have it often is somebody makes a violation, okay?

They had a lot of noise and they had the bonfire.

They do it for a week.

And they're like, oh, but you already called us on day one, doesn't matter that we did it for five days and didn't stop.

It was the same violation.

So that's why I'm calling out the per day.

So that penalty goes to the property owner?

Yes.

That's my recommendation.

And less penalty to the renter.

Nothing.

Well, that's actually an interesting question.

What what I inherited when I became director in 2021 was the compliance officers were pursuing take using a criminal approach to code enforcement.

That created a big backup in the DA's office.

It also was sort of a tone of let's go after the bad guys as opposed to let's go after compliance.

Um we met on this at a workshop back in 2021, 2022, and I said I don't want to go after the bad guys.

I want to go after compliance.

Title 8 and Title IV, they give us pathways, two pathways, and Dan Yo's going to talk about those pathways.

One's a civil pathway, one's a criminal pathway.

We could choose to go the civil pathway, which was what I suggested to the board back in, I think it was 2022.

I said I don't want to do a cri we'll reserve our right to utilize the criminal pathway, but I want to use the civil pathway.

I want to put liens on property, I want to start finding people to get compliance, and that person is that property owner.

Because I can't control a tenant, I can put a lien on somebody's property.

That doesn't mean we forfeit the criminal approach, and the criminal approach is to go after the bad guy.

But it's my goal isn't to go after the bad guy, it's and have Kenny's team involved.

My goal is compliance.

So I can revoke on day one of an incident.

No.

Yes, you can.

Oh, if they have three.

If they have three, yes.

I w I don't think that's our intention.

I I like your comment that the intention is to get compliance, but there's no remedy if I had the bonfire, and we were having such fun around the bonfire, and I don't know what something else, you automatically I'm done.

And that was a renter that caused that, and there's no recourse for the owner at all.

You're revoked audio, see you later.

The record can put recourse in their agreement with the renter.

Correct.

The opposite of that is that we go out on Friday night because they're having a loud party till 1130 tonight and they're burning wood.

We go out and give them one, that's one instance.

Would you agree that's one instance?

No, well, it's two violations.

You would agree that's one instance.

I think you inspect once and one and it's back to the city.

I'm just asking, trying to follow your line if it's one instance.

Right, and then I think tomorrow.

Saturday night, the same thing happens again.

Now that's that instance two?

Yes.

Okay.

I could agree with that.

Yes.

Okay.

Is it for inspection, per review, whatever you want to call it?

Supervisor Horton.

I'm not trying to revoke you on moment one.

Kenny shows up because somebody's parked on the sidewalk and that's a parking violation and they get a ticket.

How does Kenny know that's a short-term rental and he's reported to you?

Can you market in CAD?

Can you do that?

We don't know whose car done.

I don't know whose car, whether they were inside the rental.

Let's assume that they admit that they are staying at that moment.

That's gonna be a tricky one.

I'm not suggesting that we register vehicles and things like that.

No, I'm suggesting we register houses in the system.

So we know that that house is a license.

I think that's a really good point.

We can let dispatch know that this is a registered vacation rental, right, Kenny.

You have it in the business license system.

Or not.

Anyway.

Kenny's not here.

He left.

Well, the well, actually, we won't ask Kenny.

I'm gonna tell you what our standard operating procedure is, actually.

You might never know about that.

Our standard operating procedure is for every single business license that is not a home-based business or out of town, they fill out a form for dispatch.

And that form identifies who the responsible party is, should anything happen after hours.

And we provide that to dispatch already.

So our standard operating procedure would do that.

Dispatch might not need to call.

A deputy could roll up and write a parking ticket for being on the sidewalk and it's over.

But that's just a violation here anyway.

And that shouldn't, I I don't think that should be on the property owner who owns the short-term rent.

You should write a ticket to whoever did the parking.

I don't think it should count against the home.

And the parking enforcement's Title 10, and we're kind of camped out in Title IV, Title VI, and Title 18.

So just these are my last things.

Title IV, I just wanted to point out Title IV again is business license.

And so I'm I'm suggesting we're using Title 18 for the entitlement and for the standards, and then we transition to Title IV because they need a business license, and whether or not you put the penalties in Title IV or Title 18, I'll that's I'm open.

Title IV, if you have a violation of Title IV, it kicks you over to Title I, which basically says a violation of the municipal code's a misdemeanor, not more than six months in jail, not more than a thousand dollar fine.

If you violate Title 18 in the mayor, I know you don't like this, but it kicks you over to Title VII for a nuisance.

And I know you don't, but it's there.

And for the nuisance, we can record again, we're going over after that landowner.

Which might mean that the violation would be better housed in 18, where we have clearly two pathways built in.

But with that, um, I can answer questions.

I know the public's here, and I know Dania has a presentation.

Well, and we're we're gonna we're working on Title IV with our business license as one that we're updating anyway.

I just think your um enforcement activities should be in the chapters of their issue.

And so if I'm issuing a business license to an individual and he's violating their administrative permit conditions, stick to the thing that is the thing.

So you're not needing it, we're gonna take your business license.

We're gonna fine you $500 per day of review or per whatever, and then if we have to come back the next day, well, you're in for it again.

But I'd like that actually to align with what we do to everybody in their business license.

A liquor license if you're violating guess what?

First offense is what it is, $500 if we catch you, and Kenny comes and does a liquor test on you, and you you bum, and then the second time it gets more expensive, the third time you're going to the liquor board and potentially so I just like consistency across what we do, and I I like a hammer in the right place, but I don't like that we pounded somebody into the ground because they had a wood burning fire, and I used three different statutory opportunities to nail you.

I guess I'm just being honest, right?

Whichever bucket we're going, let's go in the bucket.

Well, like I always say, I'm giving you a launching pad, you can nail landing patents.

I I would not necessarily counter that, but I will add for thought.

There are times we have a people immediately.

For instance, road theses on the grill in a restaurant, you're done.

Shut your doors.

Oh, I didn't say there couldn't be business license activities that were immediate.

I'm just saying keep it in that chapter, and we treat them all the same, like you said.

And again, like I said earlier, especially starting out in the beginning, pretty heavy-handed approach, does not offend me.

Especially since these will be in neighborhoods.

I think it's really important that we're very careful about that.

And we'll just remind everybody that the five of us a year ago in this meeting said we are not going to allow them.

That's what we said.

Period.

Full stop.

Five of us.

Well, four of us.

But as a body.

As a body.

But then as a body, we changed our mind.

Well, we haven't changed our mind yet.

Oh.

We're investigating.

I'm listening.

I don't know that everybody's mind has changed.

As a body, it hasn't changed because we're have not taken action yet.

And I'm willing to listen and I'm willing to change, is what I'm saying.

I just want to remind everybody that's where we started from.

Right.

So you know, I feel like and I said this at the meeting we were at.

This this this whole thing, like everything related to land use is a massive balancing act.

Yes.

Massive balancing act.

Because the people who are against it who are sitting in this room have the right to use their land.

But so does the neighbor who bought that house.

Right.

So it really that, you know, finding the sweet spot is important.

And I agree with Supervisor White on this.

And I think we probably all sort of lean this way.

I would prefer to start at a higher level because we're introducing commercial activity, legally introducing commercial activity in a residential neighborhood.

And so, because of that, it should be restricted.

Yes.

The code, any code that you deal with.

The bill, and I'll use the fire code because I'm most familiar with that.

Where there is the highest hazard, you have the most regulation.

So institutions, hospitals, schools, points of assembly, maximum regulation, maximum fire protection systems, maximum built-in protections, and it tears down to residential, where there is essentially minimum.

You know, if you want to have a wood burning fireplace in the middle of your bedroom, go for it.

Um because the exposure is not great, right?

But I feel like here what we're doing is we're exposing both sides, the the people who don't want it and the people who are trying to run a business.

And I I think that we need to start higher and let there be proof that the system is working.

Yeah.

Um I'll point out one more thing from the people I've heard from, and this is this to me points out the dichotomy of this whole thing.

The um, and I'm sorry, I forget your name from the realtor association was here.

Sean.

And and uh you know, I heard from Sean, hey, I you know, um let's just make this as simple as possible on a regulation.

I'm paraphrasing Sean, don't get mad at me, just using this as a point.

Um just do it, no regulation.

Um and I heard from two very good friends who are realers, long-term relayers, and they both said a hundred and eighty degrees opposite of that.

Don't allow them.

So that to me emphasized that the the dichotomy of of the struggle that we have with with this, that is two people in the same industry with completely different points of view.

Well, and and I think you said it absolutely perfectly.

We are introducing a risk and an elevated risk into an atmosphere that does not ordinarily see this today.

Is this coming in our future?

Yeah, this this is coming.

This is gonna be a normal thing before we're all dead and gone, but because this is uh uh injury situation, uh a higher level of oversight is in my mind morally mandatory.

And um if the $750 administrative fee puts you out of the gang, you shouldn't be in the game anyway.

100%.

I agree.

I you know, the expectation for most people is when you purchase a home in a neighborhood, it's for that neighborhood for to live there.

I understand that people purchase homes also for investments, but the role of a neighborhood first is to provide you know housing and and people place to live.

So if the home is going to be used for short-term rental, I I don't think it's inappropriate to have a high level of oversight.

I think it's very appropriate and necessary.

I can agree with that.

I just I'm not interested in moving it to criminal.

We just take their business license.

I mean, there's oversight, then there's over jail.

But it might have to go to criminal just take their business license.

The criminal act is you don't have the business license.

Okay, well, we would get there then.

So I'm fine with that.

Right.

But I'm talking about no, you you don't have it.

That is a different that's a criminal action.

The minute they start operating, once we revoke their license, you have it.

Then you run out is there.

Right.

I'm just saying I don't move it criminal.

But I mean, just so we're all aware though, by default, you know, as established in the CMC, technically, any violation of certain C is a display.

Right.

But that is also discretion in terms of how the city wants to pursue enforcement.

Right.

So there have been times in the past when we're dealing with you know various land use and you know structures and so on and so forth, where the city has taken approach of, you know, with applying just an administrative approach, you know, the owner of the subject of a violation is not really being responsive by people.

They say, okay, well, who cares?

Right.

No big deal.

I'm not going to rectify remedy the situation.

But where you have more enforcement team is if the city consults or the DA's office and decide you speak up a little lot of.

We we decide, hey, you know, we need to go in with a stronger approach, we're gonna we're gonna initiate a criminal proceeding.

So just so everybody in the room is aware, we already have that established in C CMC.

Technically, any violation of the ordinance that we have on the books is a misdemeanor.

Right.

As long as we can I mean, I I agree with Lori, I'm fine with that.

If we do the civil part, which is your kind of area anyway, I'm fine with that.

500 a thousand revocation, or whatever.

Maybe we maybe there's four, maybe there's five, whatever the instances are.

But once that license is gone, then it goes to criminality.

Because then they're operating with a times, right?

And they're operating a business without a license.

And I and particularly in this category, I would not say that we would do what we would normally do, or someone who's operating without a license, which is make them get a license, right?

So in this case, their license has been revoked and they're still operating.

And so we should treat that the way we would any other people.

So just for clarification, uh just kind of sort of alluded to it.

So the code, Title IV, if we look at business license, title 18, whatever.

There's lots of penalties already in the code.

I I have not given you anything that's outside the framework of the existing code.

So it's it's your decision, obviously, but do you want to just default to the enforcement that's in the code, or do you want to supplement the enforcement that's in the code?

Well, what what are the penalties in the code?

Right there.

Oh, I know what the supplement is.

I'm looking it up.

Okay.

Well, she knows that your criminal penalties in the code for a misdemeanor is not a fine not to exceed a thousand dollars and jail time not to exceed six months.

Um so we've had similar types of cases a long time back.

When it comes to nuisance cases that come in, the general application becomes difficult, which is why I think folks department was smart to shift because what happens, let's say a fence thing, a fence issue.

Our justices of the case are not putting people in jail or minor nuisance issues.

We've asked for it in certain cases, but the practicality hasn't happened, or a case gets continued, and then you are six months down the line before anything has been able to be done because the criminal justice system is not always the best suited for the minor violations.

If it's failure to have a business license under 404.010, it would have that misdemeanor application, and that's what it would be.

Okay.

So for the business for the business license, it would be we would default to Title I, which Garrett just spoke about Title One, but not more than six months in jail and not more than 1,000 uh dollars, and that's C CMC 1.08, or it's the revocation of the business license.

There's not a fine and there's liens.

So let me look up my liens.

Yeah, no, I I I don't, I think we need to have a category for this.

Okay.

I don't I don't think the faulting at least going back to the comments we've all made, start a little higher, and if it if there aren't issues, we can default to that later.

The question for I think for us is not retaking his business license because you showed up and he was berming the stove and the thing all in one Friday night.

First of all, the owner's not even there.

Well, so you're calling the owner and saying, hey, you got Johnny over there that just did four things, but so that's still think that's day one.

That's one penalty.

Well, what if what if what if you what if the first offense is a call to the responsible person to address it?

And then you come back to the case.

What if we make it four steps?

And step one is they get an opportunity to remedy to remedy the situation.

Right.

So would you want to charge change it to first time penalty is nothing, zero.

Second time penalty, five hundred, third time penalty, a thousand, fourth time we pursue revocation.

Yeah, yeah.

So it's a time versus number of incidences.

Okay, so first time is you made a mistake.

So zero dollars.

Okay.

Yeah.

But the responsible person.

The responsible that responsible person has to come out.

Does that seem doable, Dan?

Yeah, and again, I I I'm sort of sort of reserving some of my comments, but I'll go ahead and maybe launch forward a little bit here.

So those are the mechanics, right, that we're talking about.

You know, that's why I prepared a mock-up in skeletal form.

And a lot of the language that you see there in text, you know, in effort that was a question mark, yeah, right.

Because some of those are policy-related questions where I want to receive input from the board and from the community, and all the stakeholders in this room, uh, some of those other questions are not policy-related.

They're mechanism, right?

And they're legal questions.

Um so I'll give you an example.

A few minutes ago, this board was talking about quiet hours, right?

And I think, you know, in a general sense, everybody understands what we're talking about.

When Hope says from 10 to 7, we're going to implement quiet hours.

Now, as an attorney, though, as a legislative drafter, the questions I have to ask is from both the mechanism and in a real life application scenario, how do we enforce upon that?

What does that actually mean, right?

So when you say when you say quiet hours, I mean something, so some of the language I put in there as a question mark would be well, what if you have an effect, right?

Well, that would violate quiet hours.

I mean, if you have a party in your backyard, you know, during those prohibited times, that seems to be pretty obvious.

But what if you what if it's a nice summer night and you go outside with a group of three people who are standing in the backyard deck, you've got a cologne in your hand and a cigarette in the other.

Is that a violation?

Well, you know, the sheriff's usually in my box, right?

I wanted to say that the jail.

So so then the question becomes well, how do you legislate this, right?

The whole purpose of this discussion, how we got here today in the first place, is because there was a question of clarity versus ambiguity, right?

And and as a legislative draft or as an attorney for the city, we want to avoid ambiguity.

So when we have these gap fields that are left unaddressed, and of course, some of these mechanisms, I could make a best guess and fill in the blanks.

You know, forms of notices.

How does it go out?

Who does it go out to, what are the contents of this, what are the what is the manner of delivery?

You know, email, you know, first class certified.

All those things, there some of that language is pretty standardized in both NRS and in CCMC that we can cobble something together.

Some of these bigger policies, and these are policy related questions in terms of well, how do we define a phrase or a term?

So if it's quiet hours again.

Um we have talked about, you know, you don't want to exceed occupancy, right?

And we understand occupancy is if you're a person who's actually intending to stay there at this dwelling for X period of time as part of your rent, right?

Well, but does that also mean you're precluding anybody from visiting at all?

How does that mean?

Well, right, and right, and and I'm not saying, hey, I'm presuming an answer, but these are these open-ended questions because we don't want to leave ambiguity.

Because what happens with ambiguity?

When you have ambiguity, it lends itself to different interpretations.

When it lends itself to different interpretations, what that means is you know, you're subject potentially to legal challenge.

That translates immediately to potential litigation.

When you have litigation, that's perhaps an avoidable and unnecessary cost to the city, which means it's an unnecessary and avoidable cost to the taxpayers as a whole.

So when we're crafting the legislation, the whole purpose of this mock-up is to provide a sample with sample text, a lot of which, as I said, ends with the question mark, so that this board can provide input and direct.

You'd want to leave a question mark in unhappy to do.

But it would probably be subject to legal judgment.

But I also think that's a benefit of the administrative hearing, because when it's codified, and again in Title 18, we're doing the administrative hearing under 1804, or 1802 is actually the procedural due process.

We do that administrative hearing, and to the extent the applicant doesn't understand what the code says, or during that 60-day period, then we can come back and say, you know what, we thought everyone knew what no amplified noise means, but it sounds like they don't.

We've got to clarify it.

So I think Dan's point's really a good one.

But I also think with the procedural due process, we're going to have that opportunity to sort of vet that and make sure that we're capturing the intent of the board.

So how do noise, quiet hours?

How do we do that in Title VII now?

That it says for noise.

I mean, I know the sheriff's office always says we don't have a noise ordinance, but we have the stuff we do in Title VII.

We've got that laundry list of the sheriff's department won't enforce it.

It's the difficulty of the enforcement.

When you look at this, you can't run out there with a decimal meter.

Can you talk about run down the street and go let's listen?

Because they won't be doing it when he knocks on the door.

That's why we that's why we should require the property owner to have at least an external decibel here, and somehow reset what that maximum noise is, and when Kenny's guy wants up on the porch, bingo.

That's a possibility.

The other thing that you could do is if you have two documented noise complaints within a certain period of time or a day, that's a violation.

Yeah, that's difficult though, because it could be a barking dog.

And somebody's mad because the guests have a dog that barks.

The concept of no amplified noise outside is a very standard condition throughout the country.

I mean, that's not an unusual thing.

I don't know how you can get any more descriptive than that without even if you even if you had a decimal meter.

Which I'm not totally against, but even if you had one, the the noise is not going to be happening then.

So how do you pull the register?

I'm going to give you the data when you show up.

Well, we're getting too complex.

Well, again, I think again, we have seen amplified is the good word, which means no music, playing outside, bothering your neighbors.

Right, but you get to go in the hot tub and have a conversation.

No speakers outside.

Yeah.

I've seen when I was in Palm Springs, they would do the decibel meters because you have the bars downtown that the folks who lived downtown were mad about it.

And it was you'd have to be out there 11, 12 o'clock at night doing the decibel reading, trying to figure out exactly what was that source.

You're not familiar with anyone in this with the report.

Um it's possible they do in Douglas.

I didn't dig into that in my call yesterday, just because I just feel like the houses are for the most part close together.

It's hard to identify.

What was the source?

And I think it's so easy to say no amplified sound after 10.

Well, and there is a way to craft language where I mean I you know we're talking only about slightly balance, right?

Right.

And that's what you've got to do with crafted legislation as well.

I mean, it's both the science and an art in the sense that you don't want to over-define something.

You don't want to underdefine something.

So, with respect to noise, for example, maybe we do a hybrid approach of you know, amplified noise, but then also list examples.

For example, we just cannot categorically have water speakers with the structure in the back door.

So that not only eliminates the possibility of it happening at all, but it also gives a nice descriptor to the person who's reading the ordinance.

Nobody has lying speakers anymore.

You were talking about being a boomer.

Right, and that's why my kid is called boomer, though I say I'm not a boomer.

I mean a good boomer.

No wires.

I I think we're not after decimaters and creating things we can't actually.

I would be for it if there were a way to do it.

I just can't think of a practical way in a neighborhood like what's you silver as an example.

Uh you know, a barking dog in a in a house that is two houses away could trigger that.

I I don't know how you differentiate where it's coming from.

Unless you'll get smart and the cone of silence.

I don't get 99, I don't get smart.

Oh, yeah, that's smart.

I remember that.

I know, I don't get smart.

Remember the cone of silence.

Overall, and the shoe phone.

Enough on agreements, maybe to help you craft, but I I just want to make the single comment that all of these things still exist in a neighborhood and could be done by a neighbor.

I just want to be perfectly clear.

None of us are guaranteed a good neighbor.

And the courts are filled with neighbor on neighbor complaints about barking dogs and and so I just don't want to try and make something that there are going to be superhuman beings that are renting these.

That's all.

I'm just making a statement that people are people, they're coming here to enjoy Carson City because they're gonna go to a wedding, or because they want to be able to spend it with six other friends and just enjoy the weekend and go for outings at Virginia City and Lake Tahoe and our great capital that they're gonna tour.

I want to make sure we're not losing sight uh of people enjoying the community and the whole purpose.

While it's a a business, there still need to be treated like human beings and like people and like neighbors.

They're they're still people, and so I want to hear from the people from the neighborhoods that might be here.

So I'll take some public comment.

Did you want to bark?

First question is should I go over there and speak or turn on the room?

No, right there.

Right here.

If you ladies will move left and right a bit, I don't want to blow you out with my turned up on it.

My head's spinning.

Whoops.

My head is spinning right now because I've heard so many comments that I would love to respond to specifically because we're talking about perspectives here, right?

And all you folks up here, everybody around this table, except for two people, myself and my neighbor Darcy.

Our perspective is we're our residents in a residential community living across the street from an Airbnb.

You're talking theory.

Talking how I'm going to enforce it.

How am I going to make a piece of uh an ordinance specific enough so that it can be a prosecutor need?

Okay, so that's my first problem.

Uh Hope had the listening sessions, which I went to one of them, and it was good.

But again, I would love a listen session, or more than that, a QA with the board of supervisors sitting across from each other, and you bringing up your argument about everybody has rights, neighbors have rights.

Absolutely.

But no rights are universal.

I bought my house, okay?

But I had to live with the codes that came along along with it.

I give the house to my son when I die and he inherits it.

He inherits those things.

From a legal perspective, there are covenants that run with the land.

I'm not going to sit there and give you a lecture on what they are, but they're part of it.

So the rights are not absolute, number one.

Number two, I have something I want to read, but it's from a perspective of a homeowner going through a process which everybody here has been talking about, but Darcy and I have been living in.

My name, first of all, is Bart Carillon.

I currently live in across the street from a short term rental.

About a year and a half ago, myself and a number of my neighbors determined that a house in the neighborhood appeared to be doing a uh Airbnb or short-term rental.

Contacted the community development.

They signed out an investigator.

He determined that we were correct.

He issued a violation.

The short-term rental people appealed the violation.

We had a hearing before a hearing officer, and he took two full sessions of testimony in which neighbors, myself and my uh Darcy here and other people testified to as neighbors as to how we were impacted by the Airbnb.

The hearing officer came up with a uh a decision for them to cease and desist operating.

They appealed that to the uh justice courts, the municipal court, one of the courts, and the court in that case came out with a decision on the 20 on the 7th, I think it was, 27th of January, and the court issued an order denying the uh Airbnb's appeal.

Um I have to say that the work done by the city attorney's office is brilliant.

They did a really nice job representing the city and its citizens.

Um the last part of the judge's order, I'm not gonna go into the particulars, but it was really telling.

But really telling.

Um Bart, you're at your stuff, but if you have some written testimony and want to leave it with us.

I only have about four minutes more to talk.

Uh what?

About three, four minutes to talk.

Well, the the issue, let me ask just a general question.

Is the clock stopped right now for me?

Yes, your clock is stopped.

Yeah, your time is over.

But is how many others are gonna want to talk about short-term rentals?

And in general, are you thinking you three minutes is okay?

Because I can I just need two minutes.

I'll give up one minutes.

No, I'm just gonna ask thank you all very much.

I'm trying to ascertain that if I gave him five, I have to give you each a five minutes, but I only have two more of you.

And so you can have two more minutes.

Thank you, thank you.

I I think that's okay.

What I really would like to believe that the court, the municipal court in this matter, uh concluded, and I'll give you the reference page nine, uh, lines three through six of judge's order when it wrote Carson City also argues directing transient tourists and guests in Carson City to the commercial use district and not to the residential use district.

Preserve Carson City's residents' peaceful enjoyment of their property and fosters quiet neighborhoods and a sense of the community for Carson City.

My point is, my point is that you know, I have no problem with an ordinance, uh, which needs to be done because you need to know what the process is, and we need to have rules and regulations.

All I'm saying is that don't do it in residential communities.

The court in this case believed you guys that it was your position that the transnet act of Airbnb were talking about belongs in a property zone community, which is the commercial district, the downtown district, and not in a single family district.

Anyway, with that said, I'm going to conclude with, I'm going to make an offer to both the city attorney's office and you five people up there, or I'm sorry.

By this whole subject, I'd like to respond.

And I don't want to be a man with a camera at the ready.

So I can record something.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm done.

And maybe I'll ask for a point of clarification.

But I believe the courts found in our behalf, it didn't say what was right or wrong.

It said that the person violated our code and it was upheld that the city's position.

It didn't say the city has a good decision.

It didn't, it didn't proffer any of that.

It just said that it was upholding that the city currently does not have that home in that zoning district.

It didn't say that it was proper.

Two different two vastly different things.

But you can clarify for us.

That's generally correct, and the the court said that as the Carson City Municipal Code stands today.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thanks.

I just wanted to make sure we didn't misunderstand the legal.

Should I just guarantee for the oh they can hear you?

I'm sorry, go ahead.

What I what I was saying was that the court said that as Carson City's municipal code stands today, right?

That the short-term rentals were not permitted in that particular residential district in residential communities.

That's all.

We didn't make a judgment call on whether that was a good action or a bad action.

It just said we had appropriately cited that individual because it wasn't allowed in the current district.

I I would I I would say that the court certainly did not reflect on policy concerns.

Right.

What the court tells specifically is the language of the code was not vague and ambiguous as well.

Number one.

And number two, that because of the robust administrative process we have already, that there are no due process issues.

Am I correct?

Correct.

But it didn't, never mind.

It didn't say it should or should not be allowed in a particular district.

It just said, based on our current code, you're fine.

You followed the rules, the rights, the whatever.

And if I may, I mean, I I think really, mayor, what you're saying is I don't want to put worship it out because that, you know, as a matter of practice, right?

Everybody knows that if you can have a common law decision, you know, a court order that says one thing, and this is how the court applying the facts to this issue has come to a determination.

Uh when we're talking about legislation or potential legislation, and that's what this board is talking about today, you can supersede, you know, common law with specific legislation.

Now, of course, when I say that, that's just a point of order and clarity.

I'm not advocating on behalf of the district attorney's office, you know, passage for or against, you know, uh uh, you know, this type of legislation, just simply as a matter of clarity.

Now, also point out, you know, part uh that you know this was you know at the lowest court possible, right?

I mean, it is at the justice slash unity court, which means it is subject to multiple appeals potentially, the district court, and then potentially up to the Nevada Supreme Court.

Now, I'm saying that not as you know the critical driving force here and how the city ought to make its decision, but again, just pointing out a procedural fact.

Uh I haven't calculated, I haven't looked at the calendar or anything like that, but I do know that, you know, assuming that that time was not passed.

We all know that there was a 90-day stay period, you know, for the implementation of that.

It would stay for the decent decision.

Right, that's what I mean.

We're not gonna have a back report on it.

So that's all I'm saying is I I wanted to wanted us to elaborate for purposes of the record that you know, that's what this board is considering.

Okay, I'm gonna take uh I think there was somebody else in here that yeah, would you like to make your comment?

Please identify yourself for the record.

My name is Darcy Stiggs, I'm a resident of Parson City Bart.

Um I've spoken to you before in the past, and I keep this brief.

I want to thank Oak Sullivan for her.

I think it's an excellent framework to start with for new ordinance.

I think it is appropriate when you do take action.

But what I didn't hear in in the presentation was the application.

Where is this going to be applied?

So for me as a resident family residential zone.

Uh I'm not opposed to home-based businesses, but I am opposed to home businesses that require the customer to come to the home to complete the transaction, which a short-term rental does.

Well, that's my comment.

I'm opposed to that.

Thank you.

Um you wanted a minute or two nitty.

What?

Are you guessing that can't be?

Yes.

I said, did you want to make comment any?

Well, I gave up on that.

You can make your public comment.

I think you didn't French crossing station.

I I'm going, this is great if we decide we want to have short-term in a residential area.

Or if we want to use the conscious city at all, but now it's still in my understanding, they're against the rules.

And will we violate certain uh considerations for residential as far as it's rated?

I just I couldn't leave there.

Oh the outreach was great, appreciated.

I'm not really sure if we're not putting carpet force in here.

We've got to make a decision if you can want it in certain areas or not, and then if you do want it, then you then use what you've learned here to regulate it or to make us so that we can all understand what you expect from our neighbors, whether we're on one side of the situation or the other.

Thank you very much for that.

Thank you.

Okay, is there anybody else with public comment?

Okay.

I just wanted to.

I just I I guess I don't know that I mean we all kind of because I think we provided direction to you, and I don't remember you talking about this that we didn't want to restrict where, but I don't know where you my recommendation is that it's a separate and I may have failed to say it.

My recommendation is all zoning districts except industrial ones.

And keep in mind it has to be a dwelling.

Right, it still has to be a dwelling.

And only one if the bar sole has multiple dwellings.

Only one.

Correct.

And Mayor, if I can just get clarification real quick.

What I heard a consensus say in terms of penalties is the first time there's a violation, no cop no fee, but the responsible party must respond.

Second time, $500, third time, 1,000, fourth time revocation.

And I'm gonna suggest that we include with that for this whole bundle of four, it's within a 12-month period.

Because I feel like we need a time to liquor, yeah, right?

That's what we do is liquor.

I'll look at floating time frame or something.

I think it is, but we haven't had to do it.

So yes, the it's the time frame based on the license, right?

Is that what you're proposing?

I'm suggesting because we don't want them to have it over three years, you know.

I mean, no, I would agree with that.

So I'm looking at liquor.

Are we business license to business license?

Well, I'm looking at liquor, liquor, I think is really the applicable thing.

That's gonna have similar language.

I would like to speak a little bit to the why behind the all-zoning districts, because I just as a uh refresher, um, because when we spoke to this initially, um the recommendation, which which I agreed with was um start in commercial and historical, and through the conversation, uh I was able to support the all because of some of the different arguments that are made and some of the different considerations that it's important that we be mindful of.

Um short-term rentals are in this community, and so then it turns into how do we enforce and that whole process.

Other people, if they don't live in a historical district, if you will, shouldn't other people have the same opportunities.

And it's a fair argument.

Even though it would be nice to just keep it as this, it's it gets a little more difficult keeping it at that.

So I just wanted to revisit that conversation a little bit as to the why.

Well, let's look at that perspective of property rights and what you expect in a neighborhood.

Okay.

Yeah, when you buy in a neighborhood, you see what it is today, and that's what attracts you to want to live there.

Um I'll share uh personal experience with you about how nothing is static, and it's constant change.

Piece of property that I live on was brought into patent by my grandfather in the 30s.

I've been on that property now for 67 years.

When I was a kid, there wasn't even any fences in that neighborhood.

And now you can't go from house to house to house like we did when I was a kid.

Nowhere in anybody's mind did anybody think that there would be an apartment building across the street from my house until about 10 years ago.

When I'm out of town investor, purchased a piece of property, and frankly, I had an opportunity to buy, and I thought the guy wanted way too much money for it.

I could have bought that piece of property and left it the way it was.

Today I have a two-story apartment complex across the street from my house.

Nothing static, folks.

The world changes and it moves.

The expectations can't make you stuck in that small world.

This is a change that's coming.

Whether we like it or not.

We can do it this way, we can get into a lawsuit somewhere down the road.

Mayor, I was able to verify per 413, 150 subsection eight is a 12-month period for liquor.

So I would suggest you use the 12-month period there too.

I like consistency.

Well, based on based on the license issue date, is that well, no, this both at first, second, third, and fourth would be at 12 months.

So we'd identify the time of the first violation, and that would start the clock for the 12 months.

So it's based on the violations.

Correct.

Um you mentioned something about uh as we talked about the first time was having the responsible person come out.

Um I think we should make sure, and this is I know there's details that the engine work is, but I think that responsible person has to come out any time the co-enforcement officer is going to do action.

I love that.

I think it should be the responsibility, because earlier Lori talked about the you know, we're putting the onus on the property owner has the cost burden, right?

And their rep should be there so that they can understand the implications of what's happening and see firsthand what's happened.

And they're the ones that would enforce the code of conduct.

Right.

And then exactly.

Good point.

And then they can talk to those people, and our co-enforcement person doesn't have to be the one who's giving them somebody's face about shouldn't be doing it to a rent or be doing it to the it's not possible they won't have contact with them, but my point is that if if the renter is gonna you know moan about whatever happens, uh then you know that's when the that responsible person can step in and say, look, we just we're gonna get fined, so you've got to stop doing what you're doing.

Right.

And it is a clear expectation because I know, like, even with rentals, sometimes there's a the renter is uh causing problems, and then the homeowner says, Well, the renter's doing it, go after them.

Exactly.

And that is not okay.

Right.

So I think that this is a nice way to make sure it's very clear.

And I really like the notice scene in this stuff is the responsible whoever uh no, I hear you.

It's like a liquor manager.

Right.

Yeah, yes, yes, yes, and I really like posting their code of conduct and just printed a VRBO about a month ago in in Anaheim visiting some mouse friend and um uh the the uh had the business license and the code of conduct run on the wall.

Is that a consensus to add that posted?

Yeah, yeah, okay.

Okay.

Well, and so then just so I'm clear, the other consensus is we're we're elevating what Hope had previously suggested, right?

So instead of just having a designated person who's able to respond, maybe a phone call or email to some sort of an issue within 30 minutes.

Now we're saying the responsible person has to physically be present on site at the property if there is a call for service.

If there's a 30 minutes if there's a violation, okay.

I would put it if there's a violation.

So there's a violation.

And I think we can define what that person is.

Yeah, we can define what does it mean to be the responsible party fill in the blankets.

I just wanted to make sure that that was.

I I wouldn't do that because it it could change.

It could change.

Then they need to change it with us, whoever that body is.

Because they can update the owner designation.

So the changes I have the next suggestions of to Dan while he's crafting this, um looking at NRS 244, which apparently regulates short-term rentals, um, and finding some common language that creates continuity between statute and municipal code.

Um it looks like in 2017, AB 321, and in 2021, AB 363 uh passed out of the legislature, and there's language in there, one I wrote down uh which whatever weirdness my mind plays on myself.

Um a facilitator, right?

So that's what we're asking.

We want the accommodation facilitator to respond.

So if we have some common language between our municipal code, common definitions to statute, I I think it puts us in good state.

Well, I I think that's a great idea that that's music to my ears, and I will tell you that that's how I always craft ordinance language, and uh is I always first look to NRS to see if there's all the existing language if it's already you know withstood any sort of legal scrutiny, we're already automatically on better footing.

And also just drawing for personal experience.

I mean, I spent 10 years as a state level legislative draft, or that's just how by default I draft anyway.

No point in recreating the wheel when something already exists.

Uh so yes, absolutely I will be whenever I draft any ordinance of any type, the first thing I do is I look to NRS to see if similar language or identical language is already in existence.

But the thanks for putting that on the right.

You're gonna have to come up with some way for that accommodated accommodation facilitator.

Commodities facilitator to work because it's I mean, you know, it's impractical to think that they would list one name, and that name is always going to respond.

That's let's say I'm the accommodation facility.

So I don't know if there's alternative.

I mean, I I understand that we're gonna have to come up with something.

Right.

Because I we don't want to have to be responsible for always accepting the new I I mean, I don't know how we do that.

Well, it's the same with the liquor manager.

There's a lot of businesses that have multiple liquor managers instead of just one.

So they're just the property management company like multiple.

I mean, I think we have to decide if we would allow a company to fill that role.

I think we would.

Yeah, I think that's I would agree to I just want to make sure that we're yeah, that we're not so narrowly focused that it's one name.

The owner might be in Florida, right?

No, I yeah, no, I don't suspect it would ever be the manager would be within 30 minutes.

I agree.

I just want to make sure that we're not so narrowly focused that we're only taking one name.

And I also want to make sure that Hope isn't responsible for keeping track of 15 names that change four times a year.

No, they are with a form like they do liquor manager.

Yes, that's hard.

But did you have some public comment right here?

Do we have any idea on a time frame when the board makes what's going on in a draft?

Yeah, that was on one that she had on the thing here.

July 7th.

Okay.

That's final.

That'll be the final.

First reading April 16th.

That's gonna be estimated.

Yeah, it depends on how busy Boomer uh you is.

And then did you have a comment?

Gambling.

I'm hoping I've already discussed this, but I just feel it's important to be on the record.

Um these short-term rentals will be required to obtain a business license.

That's going to trigger my office.

Correct.

So 8% well, not only that.

If those properties are furnished, which they will be, they're operating a business.

All of those assets are going to need to be reported for personal property tax.

Because it's a business.

It's a business.

So I know the business license already notifies them that they need to declare all this stuff, and we're happy to work with them, but it should be known that the bedding, the beds, the furniture, that fire pit outside.

That's all property.

And it's all personal property and subject to taxation.

And they will lose the cap.

They will be at the alternate 8%.

Yeah, because they're operating a business, right?

Still a cap, just a higher capital.

Correct.

Right.

Instead of 3%, it's 8%.

Or six.

Well, 6.9, right?

Yeah.

The rolling.

But I I you know, uh, Kim's comment is good, and we get that gets put somewhere in something.

But I think also that's the positive part of the procedural due process is we have a framework within the code, as Kim just alluded to.

For business license, we're coordinating with the assessor's office already.

So we do have to do that.

So that brings up another thing that just triggered my mind.

A couple of times I've stayed in Air B and B.

The owner of the property was on site and provided breakfast in the morning.

So how does that?

So now you have to do it.

Well, we address that use things.

No, right there.

It doesn't include the renting of a room when the home's permanently occupied.

So if someone's choosing to just rent out a room to someone, that still will be considered a single family home, and I wouldn't subject them to the short-term room.

They rent the room for the weekend.

That's fine.

If they're living there, they're there.

Because a lot of people have big enough house, they actually can.

But I'll fix your breakfast any time.

Okay, what else?

Do you have any blanks for Dan?

That was pretty awesome.

I'll get one last time.

Is there something in the rule?

Something that we're not addressing that you think we should consider before we send the master drafter off to his uh drafting.

Yeah.

Because there will be another opportunity, obviously.

Because there'll be a first reading and a second reading.

March 26th.

And the public and the uh planning commission.

So there's still opportunity for inputs.

A lot of opportunity, yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Did you have just something you think we didn't address?

Yeah, of course.

Okay.

Um if STR uh short-term rents are going to be permitted in residential communities.

Is there going to be a formula as to how many can be on a block?

No.

No.

No.

Really?

No.

We're not, we're not.

No.

I'm not going to tell house owner number, hey, glad you got there first.

And house owner number two, you're out of luck and you've got to wait till number one passes away or whatever.

No.

Too much.

That's way too much administration.

I think those things should be handled at a C C and R level.

Right.

If people have that belief, they should have put it in CC and R.

And it's still you have HOA agreements.

No one should forget that either.

Just because we say it's permissible doesn't mean your actual HOA or C C and Rs are going to allow it.

Those would override us, right?

So if you moved in and you had an HOA when you moved in that said you can't even rent, or no, let me use uh short-term rental quail ridge is a great, right?

You have to be over the age of 60.

They don't care.

You don't get to live there unless you're over the age of 60.

You did that when you moved in with the HOA.

So if your HOA says no short-term rentals, you don't get any.

So I just want to.

We're not overriding an HOA, correct?

One of the slides.

That's one of the suggestions.

It would have to be consistent with the government documents.

Right, for your developer.

Yeah, right.

And uh I appreciate you know, Stacey, you say earlier suppression, that this is an estimated time frame.

I will do my best, but just looking at that right now, I mean PC public hearing, March 26th, that gives me about, you know, with granites, you know, submittals, agenda publication and noticing and all that, roughly two and a half, three weeks from today to get that done.

Um I will, of course, look to see what else I've got on my plate.

I can tell you I'm not gonna lie.

So if I can shuffle some things around, I think I can hit that, and I'll always endeavor to hit that, which is as an FYI guy's investment.

There are 24 hours in a day.

And Todd had so much fun yesterday.

He's willing to jump in.

Okay.

All right, with that, I think we're pretty much right on uh time here to um right?

Yes.

It's lunch.

So we are in recess till like one o'clock ish.

One or five ish.

We're there.

Thank you.

Yeah, there you are.

I'm gonna dance the rest of the afternoon.

Goodness.

I wouldn't have closed my own.

So I can ask you.

I guess that doesn't work settled by showing this.

And you don't have to have this.

I don't care if we have a clean.

Just got a dollar.

Are you like ready to spread it?

Are we ready on the list?

Are we only giving me 30 minutes on this one?

So like that.

We are.

Okay, I'm gonna call us back to order.

And we are moving right along to agenda item 5D.

Our discussion is possible, action of potential changes to our event policy and provisions related to our street closures.

We did this a few moons ago, and it's important that I think any time we put in policies, that we come back and say, how'd we do?

We got it right.

We really biffed it, or uh we need a few tweaks.

And so that's really what this one is all about is how are we doing on it, Ms.

Sullivan?

Give us a I will tell you all about it.

But before I tell you about it, when I was getting ready to talk to you, and I put my thoughts together.

I couldn't help but to keep thinking about this quote, and I'm gonna share it with you.

And the quote is from 1812, and it's from an English court case, Rex versus Cross.

The King's Highway is not to be used as a stable yard.

What that means, and some of you may have heard that quote.

The roads are to be traversed.

They're not to have obstacles in them.

They're not there for things that are not traversing the road.

I say that to let you know that it's a privilege when you let somebody use your roads for something other than travel.

And that's what we're talking about today.

And that's why I really just maybe that was Corney that gave you that quote, but we love Corney.

Okay, good, thank you.

No, I I knew it, and it was like it was in my brain.

Actually, it was like two seconds.

Pretty impressive.

Um, I'm sorry.

Okay.

So anyway.

That was funny.

All right.

Thank God someone here matters.

You guys are what matters.

Okay, so we talk about this topic a lot, as the mayor alluded to.

So February 25th, 2022, I talked to the board about this, and we discussed having a potential special event policy at your retreat.

I think we called it a beta at that time.

We said, let's just do this test policy and see what happens.

Because we just there was this stuff that wasn't in code, and we felt like it should be in policy.

And one of the things at that time was the public works director felt like he didn't have guidance to say no on a street closure for a special event.

So big piece of that policy in 2022 was this menu of street closures.

Which when whenever you get anything on this topic going through Granicus, Cherry always tries to stop me because I always call it a menu.

And I say, no, they'll know what I mean when I call it the menu.

So you had the menu of street closures.

You all said, yep, let's try it out and come back and tell us how it went.

So we came back to you on December 15, 2022, and you provided direction on this test special event policy with the understanding that the staff would come back in 2024.

Well, we did come back in 2024, March 21st, 2024.

And we said to the board, hey, remember we had all these tests and these betas, and we had to come back and tell you how it was going.

And at that point, you adopted the special event policy that's in your packet.

It was March 21st, 2024.

And that included a menu of streets that the public works director is authorized to close.

If something was not on that menu, we were to take it to the board.

So what I've done today is I put together a list of street closures that came before the board in 24 and 25.

I think what would be helpful for the staff to hear is from you all whether, you know, we probably shouldn't have done that.

That wasn't a good idea, or yeah, that one's like a no-brainer.

Just get it on the menu, and then we can come back to you with an update to the menu based on the input you provide.

No, we have to.

We have to.

What's your why do you not like menu?

It sounds like an ordering too.

That's the whole belief.

Exactly.

And if they don't order off the menu, they go to the board.

Don't bring up Regan Lady.

Okay, so we heard a lot actually for years now.

We've been hearing a lot from Sandra Owens over on Rice Street.

And she's been saying, why can't I close my street?

I want to be able to close my street.

You have allowed her to close your her street.

And this might be something, because I feel like the board was like, yeah, Rice Street, if it's not bothering anybody, maybe one time a year.

I don't know if you want to put that on the menu for one time a year.

So we know she's going to want to keep coming back, or if you want it to come to you.

Do you want to stop on each of these or just go through?

Okay.

Talk about that one.

What do you guys think about someone's going to come every year?

Yeah.

I don't I don't have an issue with putting it on there with a limitation.

Perhaps of once a year.

Well, how did it go?

Yeah.

Did we have issues?

No, we haven't had issues actually with anything.

So once a year.

So one time a year.

Okay.

So I would like to say we should ensure that's true.

Uh what we've approved in the past is essentially what she continues to do.

I I think not picking on anybody.

But there should be some oversight.

You know, much like you know, Nevada Day wanted a super expanded bunch of stuff.

Long as the event remains essentially the same.

Why don't we put that in on the hold on to though?

Rice Street has other businesses on it.

Are we given the right to her?

No.

If you look at this slide that I have up, you'll see when Rice Street obtained the approval.

It was from Carson Street to the eastern edge of the building at 112 Rice Street.

So we were very careful not to compromise anyone else's ability.

So if you're interested in this, what I would do is talk to Sandra and Walt Owens and just say, are you do you think you're going to keep doing this?

I'm pretty sure she'll say yes.

I didn't I didn't alert her to this item for today, just to be honest with you.

In retrospect, I probably should have, but I didn't.

And um just say to her, I'm going to propose amending the policy to allow this street closure once a year with the exact same scope.

If this is something she's seeking to do, and that would be one last less item on your agenda.

I think that's a great idea.

Once she has her annual funding, she wants to do it more than that.

She has to come to you.

Okay.

Um, Charlie about celebration of life.

That one actually was problematic, and I think it was sort of tugged at some heart strings, and that happens.

But I think we should maybe say we're not doing memorials on the right of way anymore.

It's a one off that comes to the menu, or we don't want to do that.

It has to come to the board.

We'll have it come to the board.

This one we did get complaints, it was long, but it was it was what it was.

Um they ran over their time.

What does it say here?

2 p.m.

9 p.m.

and we didn't clean up to the next day.

Something like this, if it comes up again, we'll take it to the board.

Perfect.

Okay, people don't trick-or-treat anymore, so I put the trick-or-treating, trunk or treat on the same slide.

Children's museum.

So two years in a row, they collect they closed Anne Street, and they got permission from the hotel across the street to do it.

I'm a little worried about it though, because we have those apartments under construction right now that may be utilizing and maybe this year's okay for Anne, but I'm not sure if in the long term, given the development happening behind the children's museum, it makes sense.

Or maybe I'm just overthinking it and we just give away the streets for trunk or treat.

Nevada State Museum did it again, did it this year for the first time.

We were able to move them.

They wanted Carson Street.

We were able to move them over to Curry so that they didn't interfere with the traffic on Carson.

Um this is actually this is a kind of a bigger topic because I feel like for some reason groups really want to do this, they're doing it at the mall, I think.

We try to direct them to boot bonanza.

They are doing bonanza, but they still want trunk or trip trunk or treat, and they want it in the right of way.

Okay, so both museums.

Do we think we should keep this with the board?

What did you say?

Do you want to keep it with the board?

I I I would say so.

Yeah, I don't want to put it on the menu.

That's what we're saying.

Okay.

So we're keeping that with board, so it's not on the menu.

Okay.

Next one, the sheriff's office.

This was a little bit of a one-off.

We'll keep this one with the board.

And this one, because they didn't hit the um the number of attendees.

Is Mills Park not doable?

Is it too hard?

Is that why it's no other one too?

I thought it was really no here.

I think we can't loot.

Maybe I want to add up, and I don't see a stat here.

I think we have to be careful to say, oh my god, we just took 17 weekends of Main Street being closed to the public being able to diverse our community.

And that's okay if that's what we intend.

Sure.

But I I think it's getting a little bit of out of hand.

Maybe that's a good way to say it.

Well, or what is that right number?

How many times should we allow Main Street not to be used as the street that it's intended to be done versus pushing it as much as we can to Curry Street and using that one is the one that can be closed so that the through traffic can get to their to the business at hand.

I guess we know oh when we're being greedy because we want all these special events because they do help the downtown businesses because they're gonna go to the restaurants, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

It makes economic development in that area.

But at the same time.

Yes.

Yeah, and what it is between Carson has a bigger attendance standard.

Right.

So then Curry.

So curry, because it's a lower threshold, it's an easier approval to get to.

Right.

So the Carson Street, I I didn't bring those numbers, but um, the Carson Street, we're getting those are the really big events.

It's supposed to be like a thousand or two thousand.

I have it in here.

Do you have a two thousand?

It's two thousand for Carson Street.

Correct me if I'm wrong, though, on this event.

It's only in Carson once every three years.

It's not every year.

I will listen.

Wasn't your turn yet?

Okay, so we're gonna leave sheriff's training with board.

We'll leave sheriff's training off the menu and keep the threshold high.

Yeah, off the menu.

The downtown revival car show, they expanded.

And so the menu, if you look at they were Carson Street Fifth to Washington, the menu includes Fifth Street to Robinson.

And they also included Robinson, um Carson Street to Curry, which was not on the menu, so they expanded.

We didn't get any complaints about it.

They used all of it.

They used it all.

I'd say put it on the menu.

Everybody on the menu, you mean?

And we could do that because that's what we did with Nevada Day Parade.

We have Nevada Day Parade get street closures that no one else does.

So we could do it for this event that the public works director can close it the way it was conducted in 2025?

Right, like 2025.

Well, it sure draws in, doesn't it?

It brings a lot of people.

And I'm going to tell you that they give all of the proceeds from it to the North Office.

The next is I put these on the same slide because they're both brewery arts center events, Levette Amp series and Sassebration.

In both cases, they made the exact same request.

They requested King Street division to Thompson.

The board did not approve that.

And they did request South Minnesota from West Third to West Second, and the board did approve that.

So the question would be if you want to just add South Minnesota from West Third to West Second for items that the are happening at Brewery Arts.

We want to add on to the menu what we approved at the board.

What we did that's the question.

Right.

What we did approve.

No.

No.

I'm comfortable with it.

I and I I think what they do with Leva now is a huge benefit, and I'm actually comfortable with the other streets being closed.

Yeah, I'm good with everything, but Team Street.

I don't think we should be closing.

What we did approve.

Did we have any complaints on division?

No, we didn't have any complaints.

I think division is fine.

I think Minnesota is fine for this event.

Or for their events.

It could be their events.

Or anybody's events should be.

It should be an event of brewery art center, Sassaration.

It's not a brewery art center event.

They're adopting it because they run out of space over at Sassafras.

It's not a brewery art center event.

They didn't meet the count, the other ones.

The Levit AMP series meets the count.

Yes.

So what's our other challenge?

Because we're going to have Mark Twain days at Brewery Arts 2, and they're going to tell us it's going to hit the count, and they'll tell us it didn't hit the count last year.

They have told us they shouldn't hypothesize.

They've said these words.

They said they did not hit the count last year because of the last-minute decision by the city to not let them use Carson Street.

It created too much change, and so they lost a lot of the attendees who were talking about.

Yeah, before they got permission.

So I, you know, I think the the second street means the Mark Twain event, they're they're trying to expand it.

And they're trying to, you know, kind of make some ties to the cowboy poetry and Elco and sort of bring that together.

I you know, if if we're gonna say that the brewery arts center can use, I would say they can use those streets.

If somebody else wants to do it, they gotta come to us.

Okay, so BAS sponsored.

Okay.

So that's my yeah.

I mean that's okay.

The next is Nevada Day Parade as Supervisor White just alluded to.

They did expand this year, and because of the expansion, it had to come to the board.

I don't believe we had any complaints.

Yeah, no, we didn't.

They we even did post-event meetings, and there were there were no complaints about the street closures.

Just for this event.

Yes.

So do you want to add the new streets to the menu?

Or this event.

Yes.

Yes.

Okay.

And then, Mayor, I don't know if you want to talk about this, but something that came up with Nevada Day.

Um I just go to my next slide, sorry.

Was the notification.

And so what the code says is that when you do a street closure, you need to notify the tenants or residents along the street that you will be closing.

Um this turned into a conversation with Nevada Day.

My understanding from Cecilia is afterwards Nevada's Day said we should have listened to hope, we should have notified people.

And so they didn't do the notification, but then realized they probably should have.

That said, um, the practice has been when they get permission to shut a street, they are notifying the residents and the tenants.

They don't need anybody to sign anything.

They just have to notify people.

It can be a door hanger, it can be whatever.

So I guess the question is how how flexible do you want to be?

Do you want to allow a newspaper ad or uh I let's talk about that?

When you look at all those streets and all that stuff, I don't want to make what are you suggesting?

They're gonna go to a thousand places and put a note on their door.

You want to close the street, you ought to tell the people you're closing the street.

I didn't I I just said what methods are.

Well, we've had people what Nevada day.

We have had people do email.

We've and we've accepted that.

They just say we've emailed the we inventory the tent the tenants and we sent them emails.

That's still a lot, because you have to figure out what that email is.

Um we've had people who go door to door and just I think a door hanger is sufficient personally.

It's something they can print up easily, they can mail or door hangers.

No, we're very flexible on how they notice, but I didn't know if you wanted to look at just like a newspaper ad as a notice as opposed to an individual.

We do for a notice and it counts for us.

That could be true.

I wouldn't know.

Give them that choice.

They can individually door hang, or they can publish in the newspaper.

Okay, is that the consensus?

Either one is fine with me.

Yeah, or both, and then social law or right.

Okay.

Tell us how you did it.

Tell us how you no, I I agree.

I just want to see if you're okay with that.

Okay.

And um then I provided you with the March 21st special event policy.

So I only came prepared to talk about the street closures, but if there's anything else you want to visit, we have a couple minutes.

You just did the modification.

I just I didn't have anything else.

I think we got it.

Okay.

I think we hit it.

We might have almost got a whole.

I really think it works pretty well.

I think it does too.

Oh, wait a second.

Is there any there's nothing in this policy?

Bathrooms are a different place.

Bathrooms are bathrooms are code.

Oh no, you're doing it.

No, I want to talk about bathrooms.

Isn't that about administrative code code?

Yeah.

It it just makes the referral to the code and it says the event organizers responsible.

But we interpret what we're doing on 444, and I don't know.

I just want to make sure we count regular bathrooms count.

I don't have to make you bring in portables if there are bathrooms.

Right.

So regular bathrooms in all of these stores.

As long as they're accessible to the public.

Right.

So we're working on a toilet paper, an actual white paper related toilets.

Um that's what you may have thrown paper.

That's going to be related to bathroom accessibility along the pathway of what's there.

But it's going to be the event organizers' responsibility to have that documentation that they're available.

And that'll build into the number of tools that are required based on the attendance that's going to be there.

Um, some of the challenges that we had last year had to do with different members, even though they're shared attendees.

But event organizers didn't want to share the toes that they were responsible for with the other events.

And so there's got to be some additional coordination between coordinators that we can't facilitate.

That's going to be for them.

So we're going to stop a person from using that toilet if it's open.

We also need to make sure that we're um that the businesses are saying that they're willing to allow people to use their restrooms that they're not patrons of that business.

And we do know that some of those operators along the pathways of some of these special events don't open until certain times of the day that are after the event.

So there's going to be some work that we're going to be doing.

Well, the business owner should be able to say no.

But that's going to have to be actually coordinated notice anyway.

Yeah.

Not we won't we won't be sending our staff out to determine the bathrooms.

That would be the coordinator's responsibility, and we'll have some of that verification that they have to provide.

Okay.

So that'll be that'll be a place in remote work in on that.

Yes, it'll be a place ready to go well before we have our next giant carcin street shows.

So well, it's not it's not just Nevada Day, it's anyone in the usage, and all I want to do is say we should allow businesses to say we'll use the sheriff's one as an example just because that way I don't have to embarrass anyone else.

We'll just keep embarrassing Kenny.

Um there are five businesses along that route that say, yep, happy to be open, happy to put something on the door that says restrooms available to the public or open to the public.

We should let that happen and let them down.

That's a benefit because that happens every month.

Well, that's what I'm after.

That's what started it, because it wasn't that way.

Okay.

It was fortified.

Well, that's ridiculous.

Right.

If we have the bathrooms and people are willing to let them be, we don't have to add these kinds of park bodies.

Okay.

Okay.

I think so.

I have my instructions.

Uh event did not appropriately clean up after them.

Um is there enough of that happening?

We need to make some stronger language that you must clean up on the day of.

Or you get a whack agenda.

No, we let them add a day for the day out.

Actually, yeah, okay.

Cecilia just told me which one that was.

We do require a trash management plan, and what we can do is internally at the staff level.

The the event where that occurred, and that those type of events are going to go to the board anyway.

And so I think we can certainly, as part of the staff report to the board, stress the other expectations beyond a road closure, including trash collection and clean up condo.

Yes, we should have a code of conduct for a street closure.

I know.

Yes.

The King's Highway is not to be used as the stable yard.

There you have it.

Let me see.

Is there any uh public comment just so I don't forget?

I know.

I do see that.

Oh, okay.

Okay.

I just C T A Eerie Base.

They had any uh what about this?

All right.

All right, if we've done pretty good on that one, then we are ready to go to agenda item 5E.

Discussion impossible action regarding recommendations for public and private roadways, including our policy standards, and considerations related to that determination of public or private and acceptance of city roads.

Uh Mr.

Cooley start out the discussion.

Yeah, so I'm gonna throw out a little got a little intro here and a couple examples for you guys, just to kind of set the stage and then let you guys do what you do.

So public roads are owned by Carson City, open for public use and maintained using public funds.

Public roads provide access to homes, businesses, and other public spaces, and all users are made excuse me, and all users and are maintained by Carson City, which is ultimately responsible for elements such as signing striping, pavement condition, drainage, snow removal.

Well, sometimes private roads are owned by individuals or organizations such as a home homeowners association, and may have restricted or gate access.

Maintenance of the private roads are general generally lies with the owners of or entities that control them.

Maintenance costs are typically borne solely by the owners or users of the private road rather than the public.

So the topic of public versus private roads has been discussed by the Board of Supervisors during meetings in the past.

A discussion ensued at the board meeting of February 20, 2020, regarding whether roads internal to a development should be private privately maintained by the HOA.

Specifically, this is the one off of Emerson north of college.

The board identified various challenges to public ownership, including the lack of connectivity provided by the new roads, and given limited number of houses associated with the development.

Ultimately, the board approved conditions requiring that the roads be private, privately owned and maintained.

So then during a subsequent board meeting, March 19th, 2020, month later, a discussion ensued about including road maintenance for private roads and a development agreement rather than an HOA.

The outcome of this meeting, this is the development at Clear Creek and Clearview and Silversage.

Uh north, the one at the northwest corner.

And the developer agreed to provide the city with funding equal to the cost of a slurry ceiling, the internal public roads to support long-term maintenance.

The loan dissenting vote was due to the absence of a city standard for determining whether roads are public or private.

During the discussion, the board requested that staff extend the same option to the development approved in February, resulting in the roads being accepted as public for that development also.

So since that time, all roads constructed by private developments have been accepted by the city as public, unless the specific development requested to keep the roads private.

So unless a developer wants to establish a private use utility system, which requires state level uh approval and licensed operators to manage all utilities located within public or private roads remain public.

That's the one big distinction there.

So some of these some are gated communities in town, Copper Springs Court, it's a single road up off of Kings Canyon.

Skyview, which is the new Hop and May Adams uh development off of uh Longview.

These are all gated, Wellington Crescent off Ash Canyon, Cambria Loop, which is the one off Silver Oak Drive, Quail Run, I call them one and two, I'm not sure exactly what they name them, but uh off Fairview and Solomon, and in Lake Glen, kinda, because they got a gate on Curry, but no gates on the other two entrances to their place.

Some non-gated communities that we have that are private, are um there's a few offshoots of King's Canyon Road, still called King's Canyon Road, that shoot off of the main Kings Canyon Road that are private.

Uh Coventry Coventry Drive off Longview, Vista Ariana Drive off Combs Canyon Road, Coffee Road and Jenna Court, which is down at the far end of South Center, the Meadows, which is off of Fifth Street just east of Solomon, uh Shenandoah Village, which are actually a bunch of uh apartments that are up off Conestoga, one that always gets a lot of attention, Mallory Way, which is commercial properties, everybody knows about that one, and then uh there's five streets off Stafford Way that are for the most part duplexes uh right off of Silver Sage that are all city streets.

So what's what I didn't list here and mention that we've got a lot of when you look at our mapping and see private private uh roads, is mobile home parks.

Those are all those are all private.

Um there are many town home and condo complexes that are accessed via a driveway approach.

We got some like the ones down off Solomon, those duplexes and what I off of uh Stafford that are they're standard roads, you would never know the difference.

It looks like a city street.

A lot of the other condo complexes in town look more like apartment complexes, and apartment complex complexes also show up as private.

They're behind a driveway approach, or it looks like you're going onto a property, not necessarily just free-flowing down a street.

So with that, I'll let you guys deliberate amongst yourselves, and this I we brought in staff pretty much everybody tour.

If we have any technical questions regarding pretty much anything, fire away clarifying questions, yes, so I can set the stage.

So on private roads where there are public utilities.

I assume there are instances of that in some of the ones you spoke of.

So that's Wellington's a perfect example.

I mean, they're they're all it's all our utilities in there.