Supervisor Horton, Supervisor Shooty.

Here.

And Mayor Bagwell.

Here.

You have your quorum.

Thank you so much.

We're going to move on to agenda item three, which uh we have the pastor from the Sierra Lutheran Church.

Come on up, Brian.

Get us started good today.

Good morning.

Let's pray.

Gracious Heavenly Father, we thank you for your goodness, your grace, and your mercy, and for all the blessings you give us each and every day, including the opportunity to live, work, and enjoy this special corner of the world you've created here in Carson City.

As your work unfolds here today, I pray that you grant this board and all who contribute wisdom and discernment to seek you in their comments and decisions, and that where possible, the greater good of your people would reign.

Lord, many other things to be discussed today.

Grant those who have served you and their community a sense of fulfillment and peace for what they have done and for what lies ahead.

So we therefore ask for your presence and power as these leaders consider matters of finance for the future.

Please grant them wisdom to make godly decisions for your people.

And finally, Lord, while we don't know what the future holds, we know that you hold it.

And with this in mind, we would ask that you please fill this place today with the spirit of open and respectful dialogue on the topics related to the future development of our blessed city.

May the decisions made be ones that would in some way allow your people here and those who visit to see you.

We ask all these things in your precious and holy name.

Amen.

Thank you so much.

I really appreciate that.

Sure, if you want to lead us in the pledge today.

There you go.

Individual with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you so much.

We're now on to opening public comment.

Ums Adler.

So you signed up.

Hi, Sarah.

Come on in.

Good morning, Madam Mayor and members of the Board of Supervisors, City officials.

My name is Sarah Adler.

That's A D L E R.

And I am here as the project manager for Vitality Unlimited in the construction of our new treatment facility, Vitality Vista.

And I I saw our ourselves in the paper.

And so I thought, hey, I better come and give you a quick update.

Uh I look at your CSBG and I let you know that CSPG funding that can create a permanent change is something to be considered.

Um, but I want to thank you.

I want to report that we have paid more than $65,000 in fees to the city, and that our work with all of your departments has been terrific.

Uh community development department, building department, public works, paying our sewer capacity fee.

It has all been very clear and very straightforward.

So your team has been terrific to work with, as I'm sure they will be for the next nine months.

Now, to item 14A on your agenda.

Um, I I met face to face, the city manager this morning.

Glad to meet you, uh, Mr.

Martell.

And you are welcome.

You know, if you issue us a lease termination, that's fine procedurally.

But I received a phone call from the mayor that told me that we had to be out by December 31st, and we will be.

Absolutely.

Uh whether we will be able to be operational in our new facility.

We have an extremely tight timeline, of course, to get an 8900 square foot building constructed.

But we are a full team effort with Pinecrest Construction, our builder, and regardless of whether we can open the door on January 1st, we will be out of your door by December 31st.

Now, December 31st ends at 11.59 p.m.

Are we correct in understanding that?

Okay, good.

All right.

So I just wanted to give you a quick update and thank you and your team for all the all the support.

Have a great day.

Thank you.

Um, do I have any other opening public comment?

Mr.

French.

Thank you, Mayor.

Denny French, Carson City, Nevada.

First, first off, I'd like to thank you all for being here.

Um, I thought we were gonna blow away last night at 12 cents the house wanted to lift up at five something this morning.

I thought trees were gonna go down and then it calmed down.

So thank you all for persevering.

Um I am concerned about consent agendas because I feel some things get slipped in under the radar, and uh nine 9B is one that I would like to consider a little bit more deeply than just a quick vote.

My thing is the environmental protection aspect of our drainage ditches is not really being considered as much as I think it should.

A lot of habitat that has been created at the loss of creek space that's now underground or different things.

Those habitats are limited as far as wetland.

It's a floodplain, and I think that the consideration of doing maintenance there should also include the environment and the critters that have moved there in lieu of not having creek space or open spaces, and I don't see it brought up in the in the agendas material.

I also would like to suggest that it's important when we think about this LOMPA development to remember it's in a floodplain, and they're supposed to have taken care of mediations, and I'm hoping that they are taking on the responsibilities like not taking on streets to me is important that when we have new development that we do not take on new streets or roads to maintain, that we do not take on too much more maintenance than we should have to.

If they're their drainage basins, they should be responsible for them.

So I'm concerned about our taking on things that should be the developers or the the actual um home homeowners.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Do I have any other public comment?

No.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

We're gonna move on to agenda item 6A, which is approval of our minutes of March 5th, 2026.

Do I have any corrections or changes?

Seeing none, Supervisor Giomi, a motion, please.

Uh I move to approve the Carson City Board of Supervisors meeting minutes from the 5th of March 2026 as presented.

I have a motion and a second for approval.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed say no.

Let the record reflect it was unanimous.

Thank you.

We're now gonna go to the floor and do a presentation on uh health week, right?

National Public Health Week.

I like this.

This team stuff.

I thought I kind of thought that was pretty good.

Okay, so we're gonna celebrate National Public Health Week.

Whereas the week of April 6th through April 12th, 2026 is recognized as National Public Health Week, and this year's theme, ready, set, action, calls upon communities to take meaningful action to improve the health and well-being of all residents.

Whereas public health plays a critical role in protecting and promoting the health of our community through disease prevention, uh-oh.

Too much stuff on here.

Health education, environmental protections, and services that support individuals and families.

Whereas Carson City Health and Human Services works every day to improve the quality of life for Carson City residents through clinical services, human services, epidemiology activities, environmental health programs, emergency preparedness, and partnerships that strengthen the health of our community.

Whereas since the establishment of National Public Health Week in 1994, communities across the nation have made significant progress in preventing disease, improving environmental health, expanding immunizations, strengthening emergency preparedness, and promoting healthier lifestyles.

Whereas National Public Health Week is an opportunity to recognize the dedication of public health professionals, community organizations, health care providers, and residents who work together to build a healthier Carson City.

Now, therefore, I Lori Bagwell, Mayor of Carson City, Nevada, on behalf of the Board of Supervisors, do hereby proclaim the week of April 6th through the 12th, 2026 as National Public Health Week in Carson City, and encourage all residents to recognize the importance of public health and join in taking action to support the health and well-being of our community.

Yay, we'd better celebrate them, right?

So we'll start with just saying thank you guys so much for all your hard work.

Please pass that on to your entire team, right?

Mayor Bagwell, Board of Supervisors, thank you so much for recognizing this week on the behalf of everybody in enhancing the quality of life that we have for our community.

The theme this year of ready set action.

I want to take a moment to recognize Dustin Booth, who will be retiring this month after 30 years of service to Carson City in improving our public health.

He has helped us be ready.

He has helped us be set, and he has taken much action on behalf of the residents of this community, and he has done a phenomenal job.

I have one of those big stamps in black denied.

His wife might disagree.

So after 30 years.

And without him, we wouldn't have had the mentorship and the leadership that we've needed during some very difficult times over these last 30 years.

So thank you so much for everything that you have given to Carson City.

You truly are a pillar of what it means to be a public health professional.

Thank you.

So very happy for you and your family.

Very disappointed for us, because I know you'll have a that'll be a tough, tough one for someone to fill, but thank you for all you've done for Carson City.

What's the date?

April 10th will be my last day in the office.

Public Health Week.

Gee, whiz.

Well, congratulations.

Okay.

Sorry.

Congratulations.

Yeah, right.

Pain.

Okay, we're now to our consent agenda.

Uh Supervisor White, your disclosure, please.

Disclosure is in regards to item 9B.

NRS 281A.420 requires me to disclose a conflict and abstain from voting when I have a disqualifying conflict.

In my private capacity, I serve as president of the Nevada State Prison Preservation Society.

In that unpaid volunteer position, I have a fiduciary duty to the prison preservation society, just as I have a fiduciary duty to the Board of Supervisors in my role as Carson City Supervisor.

The Prison Preservation Society is a party to a number of contracts executed with Simerson Construction.

However, none of the work that Simerson performs at the prison preservation for the Prison Preservation Society has any relation to Carson City.

And this agenda item to consider an award of contract to Summerson is not related in any way to the Prison Preservation Society.

Although I do have a commitment and a private capacity to the interests of the Prism Preservation Society, I do not have a pecuniary interest in the matter, and in my j independence of judgment is not materially affected by my dual fiduciary duties.

I make this disclosure for full transparency, but I will be voting on this matter.

Again, item 9D.

Thank you.

I have almost an identical one for item 9D.

And it'll start off exactly the same because it could be we have some lawyer that writes all these.

So we have consistency, but NRS 281A 420 requires me to disclose a conflict of interest and abstain from voting when I have a disqualifying conflict.

For full transparency, I am disclosing that as mayor.

I've coordinated efforts with the city manager for a community outreach endeavor to receive interest from people in organizations with the skills to provide volunteer services in assisting with the Seahill Flag Restoration and our Garrison America 250 flag projects, both of which are done through the nonprofit foundation for Carson City Parks and Recreation in partnership with the city.

I also serve in an unpaid role as treasurer of the foundation.

As a result of this outreach, the city's manager's office secured some unpaid labor services voluntarily offered by Simerson Construction as a contribution from a community member.

I did not personally solicit any volunteer work from Simerson Construction, and their volunteer work was offered prior to my knowledge of this agenda item.

I do not have a pecuniary interest in any capacity with respect to the Seahill or Garrison Flag projects.

Any volunteer work provided by Simerson Construction is unrelated to this agenda item, and I do not have a commitment in a private capacity to Simerson or separately to the foundation in a way that it would affect my independence of judgment on this matter.

Under these circumstances, I do not have a disqualifying conflict under Nevada ethics law, and we'll be voting on this item.

But again, I'm just making this disclosure for full transparency.

I don't think anyone else had anybody else working with Drew.

So now we're ready for the consent agenda.

Any member want anything?

If not, Supervisor Giomi.

Oh, not 9B, 9C, the troublesome 9D, 9E and 9F is presented.

Not really troublesome.

Second.

I have a motion and a second for approval.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed say no?

Let the record reflect it was unanimous.

I can't uh vote.

So I can't vote on the shooting.

Just let me okay.

Oh, you're down.

All right.

We will move to agenda item 11A, which is discussion and possible action on rapid construction inc is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder for the Southeast Sewer Conversion Phase 9B of the project.

Darren, are you gonna give us uh just a briefing on how we're doing on the sewer connection project?

Good morning, Darren Schultz for the record.

Thanks for uh having us and entertaining this before you today.

Uh this is uh program, a project that you're familiar with.

We've been before you several times before.

It's uh been going on for several decades.

Um it just started with um uh finding nitrates in our drinking water there on the southeast side of town, and so some studies were put forth to determine where that was coming from, and it was determined that the best thing to do was to um remove as many septics as we can.

So the project before you here today is um uh kind of a split off from the project that we did a couple of years ago, 9B.

Uh these were the um the more difficult um uh properties to get to sewer.

Um the the previous phase we put the sewer pipes in the streets and they could connect this phase we're putting some of the pipes down below in um in in getting easements for them to connect so that the flow they don't have to pump up to the line, it can flow down to the new line.

So this is a continuation of that nine uh project that we did that is now completed, and um this is nine B to get the remaining of those uh properties in that area um connected.

As before, um, once it's built, then we put them on notice that they have a period of time um to connect without being charged a fee, um, a connection fee, and then uh if they connect within that time, that is waived.

If they go longer than that, then they have to pay that when they do connect down the road when their septic system say uh fails.

So uh yeah, somewhat uh business as usual.

We don't we've been asked uh kind of about the future and future phases to get the remaining lots that we have.

Um we currently do not have any plans or uh capital funding to go towards that.

Uh at this point, we've done the majority of the ones that we can for a reasonable amount of money, but um the the remaining projects, it's as as you go up the hill, it gets more and more expensive.

So um currently we don't have any plans to um address that in the near future.

So open for questions.

Thank you.

Does any member have a question?

Supervisor White.

Thank you.

Uh this has been a problematic project uh for me anyway.

Um I just want to take you folks through uh my thought process of where I think we're at with this project.

So project started with 626 properties that were deemed uh needed to be mitigated.

423 of those properties have been done.

Those properties are on the sewer.

That's nearly 68 percent of the project that we've spent millions of dollars on, and yet the nitrates are not showing an improvement.

In fact, when you look at the graph of the nitrate testing, it continues to trend up.

There are spikes, which I don't understand how a residential septic tank would create these pretty large spikes that are being shown.

In fact, it's to the point that um I think it's well number 38, is no longer even being tested because it they can't even get the well close enough to usable to even test.

So this project amounts to 14 homes for 750,000.

If 423 homes has not shown an improvement in these wells, what's the point of these 14?

What's the point of spending another 750,000 on what's obviously something that's not working?

Um help me with that.

Well, um, I think I think what we believe, Supervisor White, is that it took it took decades to create this problem, and it's gonna take decades to fix the problem.

So we do believe that the nitrates uh are coming from the septic system, and over decades of of leaching into that.

And so uh I mean our our hope, our goal is that those wells will be usable again in the future, and we're we're trying to do all we can to to remove the the source of nitrates that that we're aware of.

So that's why we've moved in this direction.

I I think from 1994 to 2026 is decades and I don't see the point.

Supervisor Giomi.

Can anything uh be done at the well to mitigate the nitrates?

I mean, I'm sure there's something can be done.

Silly question, but uh uh what can be done and how much does it cost?

Yeah, that I guess that's you can you can you can treat water to pull nitrates out.

There's processes to do that.

Um it's better when you can you don't have to do it at a well head.

You can you can pipe that water somewhere and and put in some sort of a treatment process, which we don't have.

So you just juggle with the cost of that.

Right.

So really what we're doing as a as a water utility is we're we're looking way out into the future.

We're not using this well right now because we have other wells to to provide the water that we need today.

But in the future, we're gonna need this source.

So we're we're starting to plan to, you know, how do we get there?

So let's let's do what we can to clean up the water as best we can now today to use it so that it's available to us in the future.

But right now we're not using it, it's too high in nitrates.

But our goal is that with years of reducing the amount of nitrate load in in the strata around the well, that we can pump it and less will be coming out, and it it we will be able to put into our system.

So that's really our goal.

It's not a today or tomorrow thing.

It's something that in the future we're gonna need this well, and we're trying to do everything we can to be ready.

Thank you.

Um if I recall, maybe I'm on the wrong project, but I thought, did we not submit this as a plan with NDEP and stuff on how we were going to mitigate and maintain wells for that entire area?

So this is this is on target with a plan that was approved.

Yeah.

So back in the back in the 90s when it became apparent that the nitrates was were going up in the wells, there was discussion between NDEP, our regulator, and our water system about you know what to do, what you know, let's let's form a plan here.

So that's that's when it was established to undertake this conversion program from septics to sewer to start that.

So that's how this whole thing started in the early 90s, and we've just we progressed over the years, several phases to work towards that to clean it up.

Um I'm not that might not be the right term.

But but anyway, to reduce the nitrates in those wells.

And so this is this program has been has been going on since the early 90s, and we're as these phases have come forward.

Um there was uh basically a 10, 15 years where nothing was done.

Then ARPA funding became available.

So it was, hey, let's go take another bite, another phase, and and that's where we were this last time, and this is a continuation of that phase trying to just clean up that one neighborhood that we've already touched.

So what will we have left than a hundred and twenty homes or something?

Uh yeah, I think it's I think it's a hundred and forty two hundred and six.

Uh well, we're gonna hit 14 with this.

Well, started with 626, we've done 423.

Yeah, that's it's the last the the properties we haven't touched is about 140.

So you sure um Darren, just um if we decided not to spend this money on a sewer line extension and decided to put that money towards treating the water from the existing well, would that be no pun intended a drop in the bucket, or would it be would it have a meaningful impact?

Would it could you make a meaningful change?

Um yeah, I mean the the difficulty is it's it's really it's problematic to to go and treat one well.

It that's that's a difficult way to do it, and it's not it's not really recommended.

Generally what you want to do is is get a number of wells that have nitrates, get it to an area, put in a treatment facility, and and out you go.

So we're and and to do that, that's that's expensive.

And this wouldn't this wouldn't fix that.

So you couldn't like blend this with the Douglas County water.

It's too high.

This it's too high.

So nitrates are too high.

That's correct.

So they're that high.

They're that high.

Yeah.

We're we're allowed by code to to to go to a level five.

Um, and this well is 50.

Cool.

Approaching 10.

Okay.

So it would be a literal drop in the bucket to the expense we would incur to create some kind of a treatment process.

Right.

I mean, that's really what it comes down to for me is uh is the money better spent somewhere else.

That's that's what it comes down to.

And I guess I I have to have a feeling from you that that's not the case.

Well, and and really when you look at a program like this, you you evaluate that your your return on investment, and that you know, that was done, that was done early when we started this, and as you go on, we we did all the cheap ones at the beginning.

Right, and that's really why we haven't touched it um for for a long time.

And then it was getting to the point where some of these septics were starting to fail because uh they had reached their and so we have to approve them to to rebuild and and re re-engineer their septic system.

So it was like, hey, do we take another bite at the apple?

That ARPA funding became available, but but to your point, we are very aware that this is this is starting to get expensive for the few lots that we're getting.

So that's why we haven't done much, nor do we plan to do a bunch more in the future.

Um the dent that we have made of the 400 plus that we've taken off the system.

We're we're we're expecting that to show in the wells.

Okay, thanks.

Is there more than one well impacted?

There's two.

So we we've got one is down, right?

One is too high in nitrates, we can't use it.

Well, what happens is we have to we have to flush that well for a considerable amount of time, weeks, before the nitrates are low enough to where we can blend it with our other water.

But we it it doesn't it doesn't balance, it's not worth it.

And then all of that flushing that wasted water, that affects the prison farm as well.

So it's just currently with the way we're running our system right now, we just have taken that well offline and we'll we'll get there in the future.

How how does that flushing affect the prison farm?

It's just it's the the waste of the water.

I mean, it's we call it waste because it's not drinking water.

It's a bad word, but that's the word you pump it to waste.

We just we just pump it out and it and it that's it just flows into the prison farm.

Like that's where it exits.

And so it yeah, it messes up their farming.

You can't pump it into that tank down there, that effluent storage tank, the water the pond.

We don't have um we don't have uh connection there to do that.

So it's not real close.

Well, it's closer than the airport.

I mean, we could build, yes, we could build a pipe over and pump it in there, but I mean the cost of that, it's not worth it for that well.

It's not it's just not worth it.

Okay, thank you.

I don't see any other questions.

Let me check with Lisa.

Supervisor, I I'm an thank you.

I'm in full support of this project.

Uh I think it's important that we address the problem versus over time treating a problem.

If if we're able to address it, then let's address it.

And I appreciate um the concerns that we're not seeing the reduction in levels, nitrate levels, but our permeability is so so low.

Um that it will take time, but not addressing this and keeping the septics is just creating a bigger problem over time.

Time is gonna pass whether we do something about this or not.

And not addressing this issue is just going to create bigger issues down the road.

So I'm I'm in full support.

Well, you know, let's talk about this decades thing again.

You know, started building houses out there in the 70s.

Uh problem was identified in the 90s.

We're now in 2026 with no improvement and millions of dollars spent.

I'm not convinced that the nitrates are coming from the septic tanks.

It just doesn't make any sense.

When you lay the statistics out on a piece of paper, it doesn't make any sense.

Is there any public comment on this item?

Mr.

French.

Thank you very much.

Denny French, Carson City.

Not knowing the actual locations of these wells, I'd been looking into the uh Safe Water Act, uh, Section 5 400 and 500 and and pollutants and locations of now cattle, uh, livestock situations and uh fertilizers and different things contributing to the issue of pollution.

Um there are some uh spaces to allow for certain amount of animals on a piece of property or this or that, but if it's not coming from the septic tanks, um failures in some cases or just poor placement or however um we've got to figure out where this is coming from before we try to do any kind of patchwork at the expenses that we've been paying since it was first discovered in in 1900.

So I'm going um it's a lot of money that I don't think is going to be uh helpful unless we figure out where it's coming from this nitrate issue.

And thank you very much.

Do I have any other public comment?

Okay, then I'll bring it back up here for final discussion or motion.

Earth is supervisor Orton.

Thank you.

Uh I move to approve the contract and contingency as presented and authorize the public works director to approve expenditures of the contingency if necessary.

Do I have a second?

I second.

I have a second by supervisor shooty.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any of those say no.

No.

Uh let the record reflect it is three yeses and a no by Supervisor Giomi and Supervisor White.

Thank you.

We're now gonna move on to uh agenda item 12A, discussion and presentation on our annual report by uh for alternative sentencing.

Marlena, good morning.

Good morning, everyone.

Thank you for having me here.

Just need a second to get set up.

You can right here.

Thank you.

And then hit memory there.

And then just here.

You can do the heroes.

Okay, you're up here with the all right.

Good morning, Marlena Stone for the record.

Again, thank you for having me here today.

I very appreciative of the opportunity to speak on behalf of DAS and some of the things that we've been up to.

Um, team consists right now of 20 team members, and our department is split up between professional staff and officers.

Our professional staff consist of specialists, casework, our drug testing team, and we have uh full-time staff, part-time staff, and a contract employee.

Um, I will jump into the officers, and so um let's see here.

We have full five full-time officers and one contract officer, and between the six of them, they work on an average caseload of over twelve hundred cases.

The cases consist of pre-conviction and post-conviction cases.

They are split up between specialty courts, formal probation, informal probation, and then pre-conviction, which is pretrial, pre-sentence, bail, both from justice and district courts.

These six officers will pair up in teams and they go out and do home visits, and the home visits will usually be more of a welfare check to make sure that our clientele is in compliance with all of their court ordered conditions.

They also identify if there's resources that are needed with housing, employment, food, things of that nature.

And they work very closely with the sheriff's office, and if there's ever opportunities to incorporate the most team, they have established great working relationships with the most team if there's ever anyone that's in need or having a mental health crisis.

Once a week we have an officer on call, and what that means is any time, 24 hours a day, if local law enforcement makes contact with one of our clientele, they will reach out to an on-call officer.

The on-call officer will then pull up the case management system to see if this individual is in compliance or out of compliance with their court conditions and make the decision to place a hold.

And then the local agency will then arrest or detain or let them go based on what our on-call officers recommend.

In addition to being on call, our officers are in the office, and usually they work very closely with our professional staff, and they're there as a support.

So if the professional staff needs assistance with addressing any type of violations or have questions regarding positive drug tests, the officers are available to assist them with that.

They also are required to have yearly mandated training through post.

So everyone has been in compliance with that, no problem.

And in addition to that, they have had the opportunity to include professional development to attend conferences.

And so last year, 2025, our department was able to attend the American Parole and Probation Association Conference, which they discuss best practices for individuals that are on any type of supervised release and monitoring, and our teams have brought back ideas that they feel that would work well within our community and our caseload.

And same thing.

So what that basically means is there was a time when any time our clientele would violate a court-ordered condition, oftentimes they would be taken into custody, and it would just be a vicious cycle of they'd go into custody, take up room in the jail, the courts would be overwhelmed with cases, get released, start the process all over again.

But I'd say in the last three and a half years, I'm pretty proud to say that we have really implemented best practices, which includes rehabilitation, not necessarily incarceration.

So our officers and our professional staff really tried to push resources and identify that we're not looking for perfection, we're just looking for progress.

So if that means securing employment or housing or sobriety or making attempts to be better citizens in our community, then we recognize those as wins and try to really implement the things that are going to help our clients succeed.

So our officers have done an excellent job in kind of turning around what was the way of doing things to kind of the better model, which is you know, making progress.

They also have pretty large caseload numbers.

Each one of them respectively carries about 240 cases a person.

Our specialists are frontline technicians, and they're the ones that generally will answer all the phone calls.

They're doing all the data entry, so anytime we get treatment reports or completions for community service or victim impact panel things, they're the ones that are responsible for entering all of the data.

They answer all of the questions.

Sometimes our folks aren't very pleased with the way things are going, but they are excellent at kind of diffusing the situation and reinforcing that we're actually there to help and we want to see them succeed.

They average about 150 people a week that come through our doors, and that can be anywhere from just paying a supervision fee, asking questions, people getting released from custody, they don't know where to go or what to do, reminding them of their upcoming court dates, andor going over their conditions and making sure that they're in compliance.

Our pretrial team consists of two full-time pretrial managers, and they handle all of the pre-conviction cases.

So they average about 240 cases apiece.

And generally speaking, that is an ongoing caseload in terms of it's very short.

So these people are only on pretrial for anywhere from 30 days up to 90 days until they have their sentencing.

And so it's very quick, rapid turnover, and there's a lot going on in terms of trying to keep these people out of the system, right?

And providing them resources, and they do an excellent job considering their caseload.

They are also responsible for all of our electronic monitoring, which I will get to in a few minutes.

And that's a lot on top of everything else that they're already responsible for.

And then our case workers work very closely with our specialty courts.

We currently have three specialty courts that we're working in, which is mental health court, misdemeanor treatment court, and DUI diversion court.

And the average caseload in there tends to be anywhere between 65 and 80.

And so our case manager works with the public defender, the district attorney, the judges, the specialty court teams, the clientele, and the treatment providers, and then the assigned officer to the specialty courts.

And then the case worker works with the other team, which, like I mentioned before, they've also implemented best practices.

And so that case worker generally has a caseload of about 200, and they work with several of the officers, same thing, providing resources and outlets for our individuals to be successful.

And one of the things that our team brought back this year was a one-stop shop model, which means if someone comes in and they need help with something, instead of sending them out, we try to make those initial phone calls and provide them the initial resource and foundation to help kind of bridge the gap.

And so that's one less thing that they have to worry about.

Okay, electronic monitoring.

We have options for our clients who work full-time jobs or are unable to check in three times a week, four times a week.

And what that looks like is there's four options, and so we have a pretty new technology.

It's a device that will connect to your cell phone, and it triggers when you need to provide a breath breath test, and they can do that remotely at work, at home, wherever they are, and essentially that test result will be documented in their compute in a computer system, and then we are notified if there's any concerns or if they miss a test.

It's relative.

Interesting.

And it's recorded in the system.

So they can't use their dog or something.

They cannot use their dog.

No.

It's relevant.

A dog in use.

There's been some interesting photos, I'm not gonna lie.

It's kind of comes with a territory.

We don't want to know that.

Yeah, I won't.

I'll spare you the details.

It's relatively inexpensive.

It's $2 a day, and it's affordable for our folks, like I said, that have jobs and can't always peel away to come check in in the office.

We have something called scram, which is an alcohol monitoring bracelet that goes on their ankle.

It's been around for a really long time, and it's continuous, continuous alcohol testing.

It's like a transdermal version of making sure that our folks aren't consuming alcohol.

And they that one they do have to come in twice a week to do a download, but again, it gives them a little more flexibility in terms of if they work at a county or have things going on, they're able to do that.

We have something called the drug patch, which is an actual patch that goes on their arm, and that will collect information for up to two weeks.

And so if someone cannot come in for daily testing, again, two, three times a week, that's an alternative to that.

It is kind of expensive, that's $60 a patch, but for those that cannot commit to coming in, again, it's a good alternative for them, and we get relatively results pretty quickly once we send the patch back to the vendor.

And then we have also GPS.

So for certain type of cases, um, we need to put GPS monitoring and to you know, include certain zones that they're not allowed to go, and we're notified if they violate, and so that protects any type of victims in our cases.

And so it's important that we keep you know good monitoring on those.

And for 2025, we kept track.

We had over 800 tickets pulled just for electronic monitoring.

And so we have a kiosk downstairs that helps kind of track how many people come in for what type of service.

And so just for electronic monitoring, we had over 800 tickets pulled.

So although I was saying this helps the client in terms of not having to come in as often, we still have a huge population that comes in to get things installed, removed, downloaded if they want to make a payment, or if there's any violations, they have to come in and check in with our team.

So drug testing, it's a vital part of our organization.

We um we're able to capture some information going back to 2020.

So back then we were averaging about 6,000 tests a year, and that's when our clientele are ordered by the courts to check in, provide a sample, we then run it in-house, which is really convenient.

We don't have to send it out for testing.

We can have results as quick as two hours depending on you know staffing and how many tests we're running.

And so back in 2020, we were averaging 6,000.

In 2025, we tested over 18,000 tests.

So just to give you guys an example of the volume and the workload that has changed over the years.

We have a lot more people coming in for testing.

Yes, it's a huge number, but I'm proud to say that the rates of positive tests have gone down significantly.

So I I feel that being in line with best practices is really helping our clients provide them with structure and accountability and kind of reducing the risk of them relapsing.

Um we are in accordance with SAMHSA, which is substance abuse and mental health service administration.

So we have pretty strict guidelines within our own lab confirmation and validating of the tests and how we run everything downstairs.

Our labs on the first floor.

And so we're very proud to say that I feel we've we've gained a lot of confidence from our partners in terms of how we run things and providing results in a timely manner.

Supervisor Horton, did you want to ask her a question?

Quick question.

Sure.

Out of those uh 18,000 in 2025, how many tested positive?

Do you know?

It was a really low percentage.

I want to say maybe 8% of those were positive tests.

And then of that 8%, a lot of them are they have uh medically assisted treatment, and so we have to discount those because they're on some form of medication to help them with their addictions.

And so it's actually a really low percentage in comparison to the amount of people that we're testing.

Thank you.

And I believe that's all I have.

Do you guys have any questions?

One more quick question.

Yeah, a couple couple more actually.

Um of all the positive tests uh that you received, how many people were rearrested for a positive test?

Do you know in the last year?

You know, I don't have those numbers, but I will tell you honestly, it's it's on a case by case basis.

Um generally speaking, if we have individuals that are asking for help and come to us for and they're forthcoming with what they have going on, we try to provide them with either residential treatment, inpatient, try to give them the resources, get down to the root cause of what's happening.

It also depends on what the underlying charge is.

Have they been in compliance with their case?

Are there children involved?

We we have to take everything into account before we make the decision to arrest.

How many positive tests do you get before you get rearrested?

Is there a number or do you how do you do that?

Again, it depends.

I mean, generally speaking, I I don't want to minimize marijuana, but we try to give people at least 30 days to get marijuana out of their system.

Sometimes they're gonna provide us with continual positive tests, but as long as the numbers are going down, we're seeing that they're trying to make improvements.

If it's something like fentanyl or cocaine or methamphetamine, we have a pretty hard hard and fast rule that we generally don't give people a lot of chances when it comes to that.

Um we'll give them one warning if it's their baseline test, but anything after that, generally speaking, they go into custody, especially if there's like I said, children or depending on what the underlying charge is, if there's victims in the case.

So how many of these were conducted at home?

Like the surprise, you guys do home visits, right?

We do.

Do you do a test at home or do you have them come in for the test?

How do you break that up?

We do.

If if we're doing a home visit and there's something that would prompt concern or suspicion, the officers will do an on-site drug test.

If it's something where they're like, you know, you haven't tested in a week or two, we just want check up on you, they'll refer them back to the office.

So it's kind of just hit or miss depending on what's going on.

Gotcha.

Thank you.

Supervisor GLE.

Uh Chief, how how many of your um cases are are outside of Carson?

What percentage would you say?

That's a good question.

I mean, I I'm not gonna hold you to an exact number.

I'm just is it 80%?

Is it 20%?

Is it graphs on it?

I didn't I didn't catch it if it was in there.

Um so we have a lot of out of county testing.

So the percentage of individuals that come from like Washoe or Douglas I guess I meant mostly where you're doing home visits.

The majority of our home visits are here in Carson, but we do have some that are in Lion.

We have a few in Douglas, a few in Washoe.

So I'd say probably 15% at a county.

So it's it uh it's not really an impediment.

I mean, you don't you don't farm those out to the your equivalent in those counties and they don't do the same, vice versa.

They're so if Douglas County has people who are under monitoring and they live in Carson, you guys are just flowing back and forth, basically.

Yes, if if Douglas had someone here, then they're responsible for doing their own home visits.

And if we have someone we have established MOUs with all of these outside agencies, so we utilize their radio traffic, they know when they're counting coming before us, yeah.

So we do our own.

But there's not an economy, I guess what I'm getting at is there an economy of scales there somewhere that that could be shared.

In other words, where you might not have to go um out of county if you sort of trade those off.

I guess that's what I'm wondering if there's a way to sort of and maybe it doesn't balance out.

I don't I don't know enough about the statistics to know that.

Um but if if your team didn't have to go to Lyon County or Douglas County um and they handled it and we handled theirs, it it may not may not pencil out.

I have no idea.

I'm just sort of asking the question.

Um I think it could be a possibility down the road because it is time consuming to if you only have one home visit in Lion County, that's gonna eat up quite a bit of your time, right?

Yeah, um, but I think it boils down to staffing and would they adhere to your own policies and procedures that you set forth and how would they handle a violation if there was one?

And so there's a little bit of red tape, but not anything that couldn't be visible.

I think it might be worth exploring.

Um the numbers may not, as I said, they may not pencil out, you may find out that um, you know, we have uh too many in those counties for them to want to take on our load, but right we've done it certainly in health and human services where there's a lot of cooperation.

Um, you know, fire agencies have done it for a long time, and it just seems like it's worth exploring.

Okay, thank you.

So Marlena, what would you say is the number one issue facing your department?

Um I'd say the number one issue is just we have a lot of cases, right?

So um trying to give every case the attention they deserve, I guess is the best way to put it.

I mean, there are weeks where we're literally just putting out fires.

We're more of a um reactive department instead of a proactive department, and so the goal is to become more proactive, but that would require a little bit more resources and staffing, and so I'd say if that was the one issue I had to point out is I don't know that we have enough people to really manage the volume of work that comes through our doors right now, but that's a goal that we're working towards.

So can you tell me um do you see that you're violating probationers?

Um due to non-payment of fees?

Is that a a common reason or does it take more combination of other issues?

We generally don't arrest anyone for non-payment of fees.

I like I said, we we really try to figure out what's going on, and the majority of the time they're just trying to get by, you know, and so we try to work with them and put them on payment plans, and so the majority of the violations are usually continuous positive tests, they failed to report, um, they got defaulted from their treatment agency, the treatment agency won't take them back, you know, things of that nature.

Supervisor Horton.

Chief, when you look at the number of cases for like 2025, do you know how many are new cases versus uh how many tests are just retesting your same probationers?

You know, I don't.

Unfortunately, our our case management system that we're using now does not have the capability to differentiate, and I apologize, the numbers aren't spot on.

Um it only captures when that condition is placed in the case management system, not necessarily new cases versus ongoing cases and things like that.

I'm hopeful I can provide that next go around because we'll have some new technology that we'll be utilizing, but I couldn't give you an accurate number on that.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Okay.

Lisa, any questions.

No, I I really appreciate the report.

And um I you know the the making progress, I think of that.

I think of that.

What is the long-term impact?

And it's those steps of behavior change.

It's it's um you know, normalizing sobriety in people's lives.

Uh I I think that's an incredibly important.

So uh I just want to thank you for all the the work you and your team are doing.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Well, this is a discussion only, so thank you so very much.

Thank you for your time.

Presentation.

All right, we're now gonna move on to agenda item 13A.

This is discussion and possible action on the collective bargaining agreement between Carson City and the Carson City employees.

Um Mr.

Martell, the impacts, please.

Thank you, Mayor.

If approved, the fiscal impact of this new CBA is an estimated increase cost of 4,662,123 more than the five-year projections included in the fiscal year 2026 city budget presentation.

The five-year projection included increases for each CCEA position based on the existing CBA totaling 156,3413.

Applying the terms of the new proposed CBA to the five-year projection is an estimated 1613, resulting in an increase of 4,662 123 dollars over the five-year term.

Thank you so very much.

Is there any questions from any of the board members?

It's a big agreement that I know we all plugged through, but uh no questions, just double checking up there.

Um I do want to just thank the union and the committee that worked so hard on this.

Um, I think it's a huge benefit.

It's our largest bargaining unit.

Um I think having a five-year contract gives continuity, tells people what they can expect over the future years, and certainly allows for good planning on the part of the city.

So I think it was a job well done.

I know it's everyone's favorite thing to do, including your side, right?

Yeah, it's like, hey, let's do this.

But uh, I think it was uh it's a good contract.

So is there any public comment on this before we take action?

Come on up, Uriah, sure.

Uh I wise Carson City Employees Association.

I just want to take this opportunity to say thank you on behalf of the city.

Uh with the negotiating team, it was tough going back and forth.

And uh both negotiating teams were in there like a battle royale.

So with with uh process, it's a process, and uh we were able to get where we needed to be, and uh I I feel that uh with our group through the process that this is a good contract that will tackle a couple of problems that we're seeing on our end with uh employee recruitment and retention.

So hopefully this will get us across that field goal for getting good employees and keeping them for the long road.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Any other public comment on this item?

Seeing none, I'll bring it back up here for a motion.

Who would like to do that?

Supervisor Giomi.

I move to approve the CBA and authorize the district attorney's office to make necessary revisions that are clerical and not substantive when uh finalizing the agreement.

I'll second that motion.

Okay, all those in favor, please say aye.

You have a question?

Oh, discussion on the motion.

Supervisor White.

Thank you.

Uh while indeed this does uh provide some stability uh for all parties involved.

I think it's time that we start looking at where we're at in the city finances in regards to that level of wage and benefits that we are providing.

Um I don't think it is a mystery to anybody that austerity measures are already taking place in Washoe, Reno, Lyon, and Douglas.

And in fact, Carson City School District is considering austerity measures.

It is my personal opinion, and I do bring my personal opinions to this seat, that we are far too close to that tipping point to support this contract.

Okay.

Um all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed say no?

No.

Let the record reflect it was four yeses and one no by supervisor white.

Okay, we're gonna move on to agenda 14A.

This is um discussion and action on the recommendation to provide notice to the termination of for vitality unlimited as discussed uh earlier by Sarah Adler.

Um I did call them to give them as much absolute notice as possible to remind them that uh you're on a month to month and and we need it to be able to do that.

And I was pleased to hear her say that they're prepared to leave timely.

So does anyone really have any questions on this?

No.

Okay.

Is there any public comment on this item?

All right, I'll accept a motion, please.

Supervisor White.

Thank you.

I move to direct the city manager to provide notice of lease termination to vitality with instruction for vitality to vacate the premises by no later than December 31, 2026.

At 1159 p.m., I think she said I have a motion and a second.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, say no.

Let the record reflect it was unanimous.

Okay, agenda item 14b, discussion of possible action to adopt on second reading, bill number 103, an ordinance establishing a third department in the Carson City Municipal Court.

Mr.

Hohen, the title, please.

Ordinance 2026-7, Bill number 103, an ordinance relating to the judicial department, creating the third department of the municipal court in Carson City and providing other matters properly related there too.

Thank you so much.

Is there any changes?

Anyone heard on on this one?

All's good.

No changes.

Um, does any member have a question?

No, is there any public comment on this item?

I'll accept a motion, please.

Supervisor Horton.

I move to adopt on second reading bill number 103, ordinance number 2026-07.

I have a motion second for approval.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed say no.

No.

Let the record reflect it was four yeses, one no by supervisor white.

We're now on to agenda item 15A.

This is a discussion and possible action regarding the submission of a grant application to the Nevada Department of Human Services for Behavioral Health Sub award of 105,000.

Um does any member have any questions on this one for Ms.

Freeman?

Supervisor White.

I just want to uh thank Jeannie for putting up with my very extensive questions, and uh I appreciate uh her ability to articulate um my my concerns with these grants um is to no avail.

Okay, thank you.

Anybody else?

I don't see anybody else.

Is there any public comment?

See none.

Supervisor White, the motion.

I move to authorize submission of the grant application, and for the mayor to accept the sub award if awarded.

I have a motion and a second for approval.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, say no.

Let the record reflect it was unanimous.

Okay, we're now on to agenda item 15b.

This is a discussion only item.

Uh, a presentation on the priorities identified by community members and social service providers for that neat thing called a landscape assessment.

Ms.

Freeman.

Good morning, supervisors and mayor.

Jeannie Freeman, director for Carson City Health and Human Services for the record.

Uh, today I'm just here to present to you an overview of the summary of what we've got coming forward in a full report that'll be later in June at the Board of Health meeting.

As you know, we embarked on a social services landscape assessment.

This was not about trees and rocks.

This was about the people that we serve in our social services capabilities across the city, not just within city departments, but also with our nonprofit partners and uh other and other community members.

We did a community-based survey, we did focus groups, and we also did key informant interviews.

And what came out of what we got out of there were some priorities.

And we talked about some different pillars.

We asked about these different pillars, and this was the prioritization that came out of the survey, the focus groups and the key informant interviews, identifying housing as the most was unanimously identified as the most foundational social services area, both needing the most improvement and being the most important in regards to the other areas.

Without housing, it was deemed that the other areas wouldn't be able to be addressed effectively.

Healthcare was identified and ranked as second.

40% of the survey respondents were worried about covering their medical costs.

And service providers also indicated that this was an area where they experience a lot of barriers with making referrals and collaborating on delivering services with healthcare.

Behavioral health included both mental health as well as substance abuse or substance use.

It ranked third, where 51% of the respondents said that they experienced feeling down, depressed, hopeless, or overly anxious.

And I do believe that, as was public comment at the previous Board of Supervisors meeting, Sheriff Furlong had mentioned the safe talk and the issues that we're having within our community around suicide.

Food was the put forth as the fourth item.

And community community members actually indicated that the eligibility requirements are actually a barrier that they're experiencing accessing food.

And I'll talk about each of these a little bit more.

And then job support became fifth.

And then lastly, with little to no improvement needing was in clothing resources.

So that was kind of an interesting one.

What was interesting is that the needs among the homeless, not among those that are housed.

What was found is that rental assistance programs, which are the most commonly used service in the city, are actually working.

And we're finding that those are being beneficial.

What was in shortage was long-term housing.

The type of housing, that type of housing tends to have eligibility requirements that often exclude those who make too much but don't make enough to be able to afford the associated elements of that.

And that's what we refer to as the missing middle.

That's what our providers talked about.

And so needing greater collaboration to establish that long-term supportive housing with less restrictions would be important for what we could do.

There was feedback from across from participants and community members that they're not all familiar with all the different entities that provide different services across the city, not necessarily the same service, but different services.

And they established trust and trust was a really big element as to whether or not different community members would actually approach a nonprofit entity or even the city with seeking those services.

Jeannie, I guess I'd like to do the slides as we go so that we can understand each issue a little more fully.

So does that mean they're not going to be HUD eligible?

Is that the missing middle that you're talking about?

So they're not going to be eligible for any programs.

So it's it's interesting because the programs uh they'll use federal federal poverty levels, but they use them at different percentages.

So different programs might be at 150% of the federal poverty level, some might be at 200%, some might be at 125, and so they vary.

But in overall, yes, what you're saying is correct that we have situations where when they have jobs, they might make just a little too much to actually, and it can be literally $10 too much to qualify.

So then that's a challenge piece as to whether or not they go with the employment or they go with the housing, because without the housing, then they don't have the support associated with the employment and other areas and food and so forth.

So that does create some complications for what's there.

But then this also ties into the workforce development that we're going to talk about a little bit later and having those because that missing middle, there are a lot of people who have jobs and they want to improve their spot and they need to have that training, but it's very difficult because some of those programs are existing during the hours in which they're working.

And so then how do they access in order to have that improvement?

So there's kind of this, I hate to use the adage of vicious cycle, but it is that vicious cycle of wanting to improve, but the challenge is about being able to access at the same time that you're trying to do the other areas.

And I don't know about you, but at the end of the day, after I've worked all day, I'm really not thinking that I want to go and go into another training program to you know spend more time, or I've got children at home that I may not have the child care associated with as well to provide me with that space to be able to do that.

And that's something I think that I don't recall that we really did, but that potentially an area is we could supply child care.

Because I think that that's truly the barrier, a barrier for people that are working or trying to get ahead or take a class or do those types of things.

And so I wonder when we're all said and done kind of putting this together, would that help lead us to helping them have the better job, the better education, and for them to move up and get off of the uh public assistance.

And so I wonder if that's something.

So if you recall back in the 2022 community health needs assessment that Carson Tahoe Hospital and uh CCHS, as well as other partners participated in child care was actually identified as one of those areas and as is part of the community health improvement plan.

And in our effort of being a facilitator to bring those different parties together, there was the Boys and Girls Club, and there were some other entities that were building those opportunities within Carson City to be able to provide that type of access.

I think that when we look at something, it's impossible to say that there's one thing that we could do, you know, because it's it there are other dynamics and childcare is also available, but it's available in our traditional Monday through Friday, eight to five, or you know, like there's just some other dynamics.

And so it's really going to take we can pick and choose, you know, different areas, but it really you need that vision capability of that systematic approach that's going to address a systematic issue.

Yeah, I'm really looking as to whether we should and the reason I'm bringing it up this way is because we're looking at using um indigent dollars to be able to accomplish some of these gaps or grants that we can find to fill some of these gaps.

And I thought that maybe we could put a program together if they're going to school and they're at night, because like you said, they've worked all day, potentially if there wasn't some program at Western Nevada College, because they have a daycare setting already existing, whether we could supplement something like that and say, I don't know, we're gonna pay for 10 kids or something is a it's just a thought I'm throwing out because the the facility exists, so we wouldn't have to go after that infrastructure, just that they'd need paying.

I think the capacity is lacking.

I the facility exists, but the capacity for child care in the community is lacking.

I mean, it's been about three or four years since my granddaughter needed that, but um it was a huge gap in available um daycare, if you will, settings.

Um it's almost non-existent after hours.

It's it's essentially non-existent.

Maybe paying the boys and girls club to stay open till eight for 10 slots or something.

I'm just throwing that out as we look at everything we're doing to see if that's somewhere that we can fill a gap.

And I think that the board that that is completely at your discretion, you guys get to set what the intent is associated with the data and how to use those funds as it meets the needs for the city and so forth.

Thank you.

Any other questions on housing before I move on to health care?

Great.

So for health care, uh, there's a significant relationship between those with a job or making an annual salary above the pottery line and those who are receiving help.

So we still see that there are barriers with those who don't have that job, having the access.

And while we have different insurance capabilities like the exchange and and so forth, um, it's still quite expensive for um individuals to be able to do.

So it's great that we have like a Medicaid person within CCHHS that can get people connected, but sometimes we're finding that people are making too much to be able to qualify for Medicaid, right?

So, same kind of gapping that we're having, but the most used service that we have within our community are sliding scale fees.

And we know that our federally qualified health center as well as the Carson City Health and Human Services has that available with a Ross Clinic through FISH, we have some different services.

But there are still some barriers that are with getting that access.

Sure.

I assume you're anticipating the changes to Medicare, excuse me, Medicaid and getting staff trained on keeping people qualified for Medicare who legitimately qualify for Medicare.

Because those changes are going to be big, and I think we're going to see numbers drop off, which will exacerbate this problem.

It's pretty much anticipated by just about everyone in the low cost healthcare community that the number of people dropping from Medicaid is going to increase.

Yes, sir.

Which will be a burden, generally speaking, on local governments.

Yes.

Who will have to pick up that cost?

So I assume you're gearing up to come up with programs to keep people qualified, provide an understanding to people because I think it's still unclear to a lot of people on what the requirement is going to be.

And instead of verifying every year, it's now every six months.

And there are many more requirements, volunteer time or an exemption due to an illness or injury or work, whatever the case may be.

But so you're you're sort of getting ready for that.

Yes, sir.

So you're kind of still in my thunder for June.

I'll give it to you now.

Um we we just hired better, you know.

We just hired a social worker, and it'll be the first time that we've had a social worker in over two years within our agency, and that person will be starting this month and collaborating with our case manager.

That'll be important for us.

We are also having um in-depth conversations with the managed care organizations that are serving uh Medicaid patients, and we're talking with them about what the different opportunities are, and we are waiting on Medicaid.

We follow all their announcements.

We are waiting on Medicaid's announcement as to the type of provider because we are seeking to become the type of provider that will be able to bill for some of the services that we do with our community health worker, our case manager, as well as our social workers.

So have you talked to those managed care providers typically have some funds available and are they have you talked to them about any partnerships or anything where they might be able to provide some assistance?

Okay, we have visited with both of them multiple times, and so we've been having those uh conversations.

They're still waiting on some of the information from Medicaid as well.

It's unclear to a lot of people still.

So we have time, but not a lot of time.

So yeah, and so I I I get the announcements.

I'm signed up for every listserv that Medicaid has, and every announcement comes across my email, and I pay attention to what they are, and we're attending those workshops so that we can learn more because we want to make sure that we have it as soon as we have that information available to us to be poised for that.

Thank you.

I should have expected nothing less.

Thank you.

So, Jeannie, healthcare is a very broad category.

Is there specific elements within health care that you think are the largest need?

So I think that some of uh, well, what we found is like the transportation piece, which is actually something that the managed care organizations are going to they say that they're going to offer as one of their additional services with Medicaid, is being able to do additional transportation services to health care to healthcare appointments.

Some of the challenges that we actually experience within Carson is that we have provider offices that are located in multiple counties, and somebody may actually have a primary care provider, but whether or not that primary care provider is available for them in Carson or if they have to be transported up to Washoe County or somewhere else where it takes them out of the community, takes that transportation resource out of the community for a longer period of time, actually becomes more of a challenge.

There are a variety of transportation services within our community.

Some of them are restricted based on age or disability, some of them are not.

But I don't know that the public is fully aware of those transportation services.

We do know that we have the Campo Plan.

We know that we have some other nonprofits that do some of the transportation, and we do know that the Jack Bus is available.

I think that there's also it has been identified by providers that are healthcare providers that they need more collaboration with those entities so that when they're scheduling appointments that they can understand the transportation needs at the same time in order to maybe not have somebody that's scheduled at 7.45 in the morning when the earliest that the Jack bus drops off next to that office is 1015, right?

So they need some more communication, and I think there are opportunities there for that to grow.

Thank you.

You know, I think the one of the biggest gaps uh nationwide, we're not gonna solve this is providers, provider availability capacity.

Correct.

It's not gonna be.

I mean, the rural health transformation grant may address it in some of the rural parts.

Um it's not going to benefit us here.

Maybe indirectly it will, but um yeah, it's just it's a provider shortage.

It's it's a provider shortage.

Any other questions on health care.

So behavioral health, which also includes the mental health capacity, the biggest barrier that community members reported facing was again lack of providers, which contributes to that unavailability.

Uh service provider responded, uh service providers responded that um they have a barrier with providing services and getting to increase that capacity.

So uh Carson City has resources, however, those resources are regional, and so having the additional access is challenging.

Um I think that there's an opportunity for us to I think as a community, we need a bigger opportunity to look at how we can address some of this before we have a person who gets into crisis, and that becomes a piece that I don't have an answer for you, so please don't ask me for it because I don't have it.

But I do think that that is a broader conversation to be able to be there.

Also the need for supportive housing to increase that long-term success um for sustainable outcomes for those who are discharged, need additional time to be able to get on their feet.

It takes time when you come out of a rehab program or out of um mental health services program to be able to get employed again, understand the stability around life, and so being able to have some of that.

But service providers also indicated that there is a need to have more of those the shared information so that they can collaborate on what that is, and having those ROIs or those um agreements where patients are willing to have their information shared across, it's not common to get that.

And so um there's there are barriers that sometimes are in place, not because providers aren't wanting to do that, but we have challenges uh with clients being willing to give that.

But then even when a client does give it, sometimes the providers are not willing to share it.

They're concerned about HIPAA, but an ROI can give us a way around that.

Um, but we it's not there's a lot of attorneys that would need to be involved to make sure that all the ROIs meet at the expectations of all the different entities around that.

I I really think that's an area that we need to address and to have some great common forms that all of the providers agree to accept.

Um, even our nonprofits are hesitant to do things, yet when we have an individual that's in crises or has a lot of needs, it's almost impossible to triage and really have a good case plan for that individual when you don't have data and information being fed back into the system to know if we're having a success.

And so I hope that at some point we really can concentrate on getting those providers all together and even just coming up with common form that all the attorneys have blessed or whatever.

Um, and you change the name at the top.

Good luck with that.

It'll never happen.

Well, it's it's actually pretty sad because who who suffers is the client that needs that has a need.

And so while you want to protect the clients, we're not we're not helping them.

I think the way you get around it could be because the issue is you don't that what happens is you don't know how that other party is gonna use the information.

And so it is out of an abundance of caution for that patient's um re particularly when it deals with behavioral health, because the rules are even a little bit different with behavioral health.

There has to be um there has to be a wall really between in some cases what a medical provider can see versus what uh their behavioral health provider can see that that crossing barriers is often uh difficult because people are very private about that.

It it's it's it's a real it's a real hill to climb.

And I think one of the best ways to to start the climb, in my opinion, is to have a collaborative foundation so that there is trust among the agencies.

I think that that starts it.

Um but you have to remember an agency like ours, for instance, we work in six or seven different counties.

Right.

And what we may come up with here may not work in Elco, may not work in Nye County, may not work in Lander County.

So having one form I I think it has to be through a I agree with what needs to be done.

I think you have to approach it through a collaborative effort.

Um you have to approach it through collaborative effort.

And and you do have to be careful because you you it's it's hard to know how that information is used by the people who you're releasing it to, you know.

Um it's only to provide them a service, right?

It is, it is, but yeah.

And I think that that comes back to that trust factor that I was discussing a bit earlier too, right?

The client might have that trust factor with our agency, but then when we talk about having sharing information with other partners that might be able to serve them, they may not have that same trust.

So ultimately it is at the client's discretion.

And uh we we honor that.

And I would want the same honored for me if I was in that situation as well.

So on food, um, this eligibility requirements uh tend to hinder community members' abilities to actually access available food.

Even service providers agreed that the eligibility requirements can hinder uh severely hinder sometimes the available resources.

Uh we actually had in a focus um in a focus group and a key informant interview a couple of and um clients who utilize these services who have indicated that it can be demoralizing sometimes to go through the process of seeking food.

Uh they feel like they're being policed as if they're watching being watched like thieves uh when they're getting the food.

And so that's an environment that can be really difficult.

So they're finding that they're rationing their food or they're willing to go hungry, um, even though the food availability is there.

There are challenges around the dietary restrictions.

Sometimes you have people who are on medications, and even though we do have a prescription pantry um in the community with one of our partners, um, it may not necessarily be known among all the providers that that's available so that they can write that to go to that um uh entity because they do actually receive additional funding and they receive other types of food services available for that.

Uh those dietary restrictions can um be there also sometimes food is provided that people don't know how to cook, or um they if they're unhoused, they may be provided food, but they might be given a can but no can opener.

And so, like some of the aspects of what they can have access to, sometimes we have to kind of really think beyond what that looks like.

And then, of course, all of us are experiencing the rise in costs associated with uh food and so forth.

So, in in food, I think I've heard um Courtney tell us, can't remember the number off the top of my head.

So they do meals on wheels from the senior center.

Yes, ma'am.

Um is that is so how many are on their wait list?

A hundred and something on the wait list?

I think they're over 100 at this point in time.

Right.

So is that something that solves two issues?

One provides meals, but also wellness checks, right?

So then actually, if anything, right, by knocking on the door to give them their meals, there's somebody at least checking in once a week that they so in the food category transportation was also identified as an area of concern, um, being able to access the food resources during the hours in which, again, I'm working, I'm trying to work, I'm trying to afford, I'm trying to do these things, but the access of the food availability during those hours can be challenging, but then the transportation to where those food sources are um can be there.

So the Meals on Wheels program does do transportation, it provides that wellness check, but it is also limited based on age and so forth.

So there's some other dynamics with that too.

Seems like transportation is coming up a lot, obviously.

Um, and and I I'm wondering if you know, we we kick general fund money, uh, my recollection serves me three or four hundred thousand a year to um Jack operation.

Um, in any case, I I'm wondering if we don't kick that money there, and instead we focus it on transportation on demand um as a program.

It does provide on demand.

Well, it it does, but clearly there's only for disabled on demand.

Correct.

It's not right, otherwise it's fixed route, right?

So I I mean, do we, you know, what if we reduce the regular fixed routes and reduce that $700,000 uh support and focus it here where it can potentially do some good.

Um I mean, obviously we can't make that decision today, but um I I uh, you know, the the ridership on Jack is low.

We know that on the fixed routes.

And I I think it's gonna make a lot, there's a lot bigger community benefit in my opinion, if we redirected that to focus transportation for people in need.

And we may be able to do that within JAT to do some more focused stops at food pantries.

I mean, there's a lot of couple of options and look at.

That's certainly something that should be explored.

Yeah.

Supervisor shooty.

Go ahead.

Yeah, I think there's some middle ground here because not having the transportation available while Jack ridership is low, those who do ride Jack need it.

And without it, then they don't have access potentially to jobs or to their appointments unless we provide it.

Um unless we provide it.

Um so yeah, I think there's there's a middle ground and and um it's I I don't see it as an either or you can't measure what doesn't happen.

And so by by reducing services to Jack or reducing access, um what is the impact of that?

Not to not to say I disagree because there is limited funding and you have to use it appropriately and um you know get the best uh outcome for the money, but it's those those uh impacts that we can't measure that get a little more difficult.

I think the other thing in Jack, if I recall this board, we did decide we would not expand Jack services, we would keep them stable.

So I think we've kind of already made the first step to say we're not gonna take a service away from someone who has it today, as Lisa's indicating, but we're not gonna expand.

Because I agree with you that the expansion potentially is a more targeted transportation.

We look at definitely have the opportunity to be more efficient.

Right.

Right.

And I think we shouldn't discount um exploring the option of not having fixed routes and having on demand service.

Only micro transits.

Correct.

Right.

Because I, you know, I I felt that before this presentation, I feel it even stronger now.

I I just don't know that fixed routes are the answer because um you know all of the struggles that people run into with fixed routes could take an hour, could take an hour and a half to get from point A to point B, and that's really not conducive to doctor's appointments, for instance, because if the bus is delayed, um you're gonna miss your appointment.

And a lot of times you're not gonna get it again.

Um so uh, you know, I think I think it's something RTC should explore.

Obviously, we can't provide direction to that today, but it's just a general discussion.

No, but I think it's a I think it's a good one in a holistic manner to say would it be better to eliminate Route 2A or 2B and put in a micro dance.

Correct.

Right.

So you'd still be providing transit, but again, is it the most efficient?

Right.

Just and I don't know the answer to that, but it might be you might be able to not have I I don't know how many buses we have, seven, eight buses.

Well, I don't know what the number is, but instead of those, maybe you have seven or eight vans for a reduced cost, you know.

Um anyway.

Right.

Okay.

Sorry, went down a rabbit hole, but I think it's an important rabbit hole because transportation keeps coming up.

You went down a bus route.

All right.

The next area for workforce development.

Uh community members reported the biggest barrier for them receiving job support is actually eligibility requirements, including things like background checks.

Sometimes there's a challenge associated with background checks based on other situations that they've had that they've experienced and they're trying to overcome those.

Service providers reported that uh supportive services such as providing clothing needed for a job role, tools or other equipment required or providing documentation assistance is the most effective thing in leading to gainful employment.

So buying those steel-towed boots, being able to get them their safety vests or their hard hats and so forth can be um important for them.

Uh there tends to be a lack of programming according to service providers for the types of jobs that are available within our community to help get them trained up for those.

There are different employers or employer connection points within the community, but the opportunities for people to be able to get into those other places.

We have had a couple of successes that have come up recently with both our partners as well as CCHHS of helping some clients get their CDLs and so they're able to go in and they're now gainfully employed and very happy, and they were able to do that in a period of time, but they took the time while they were in emergency sheltering for them to be able to do the training, and they were very dedicated to it, and we walked alongside them for them to be able to have that success.

There is a need for some further exploration into what that workforce development is.

And I think that there are partners that are working on this at the WNC level.

We have Employee Nevada.

There are some other options that are out there.

I do know the library has programming that they do as well.

And then we also do it.

I think it's just trying to get those.

Sometimes those training programs can be 18 months to 24 months.

And that's where that longer term housing availability to be able to support that becomes challenging.

Supervisor Horton.

Do you or have you thought about partnering with the Carpenter's Union, iron workers at Teamsters to provide some of those services?

I know they're always looking for employees, members, you know, compatibility, but they might be interested in lending a helping hand in some of those situations.

Thank you for that suggestion, Supervisor Horton.

I know that we have reached out to them when we do like our job fairs and things of that sort because sometimes they'll attend and do like apprentice type programs, you know, journeyman level for people to get trained up while they're actually working and so forth.

We haven't had a lot of success with them lately attending those events, um, but we continue to reach out to them.

But we will try to reach out to them a little bit differently with that suggestion to get some other ideas as well.

Supervisor go ahead, Supervisor Shuty.

Oh, thank you.

Um I'm just also thinking back on the regarding training, but also on the conversation about transportation.

I know we've talked about this a little bit at RTC, but reaching out to employers, um, reaching out to um other providers in terms of helping with transportation costs to help folks get to the training.

And uh that could be something that as we continue this conversation to keep in mind.

Perhaps there can be a partnership to help offset some of the difficulties of getting folks to training if they don't have access to a vehicle.

Thank you for that for uh Supervisor Shuty.

I think I I keep listening to all these really wonderful and creative ideas, and I'm hoping that some of our nonprofit partners are paying attention to this presentation today because I think that that is food for thought for them because there are certain elements that we can do, but then there are certain elements that we don't have the capacity, we just don't have capacity to be able to do.

There is um Nevada Works has I don't want to say a ton of money, but quite a lot of money and program opportunities for people to take training courses and things of that nature, maybe um that you guys can get hooked up with what's what's out there that you you're not aware of, but I know and I served on that.

There's it was shocking to me how many actual programs there are that and several of them had very limited participation.

But I think again, it's because people don't know it's there.

The capacity through Nevada Works is there.

Right.

Absolutely.

Yeah.

So maybe we can do some more linkages and see what we can put together there too.

Yeah, and we have definitely had a lot of conversations with our partners.

You know, even if we have a partner in the community who does a different type of social service and doesn't do what we do in our agency, we make sure that they're aware of different job opportunities.

We share the fires that we get on our job board that we have available.

But I do think that there is more opportunity.

It's and it's I'll be honest, um, not that I'm looking.

Um, but go when you go to look for a job, it's actually really quite challenging nowadays to look for a job because it's hard to know whether or not it's some scam on the internet or it's a legitimate opportunity.

It sounds really great, but then you have to pay them so much money in order for you to get the job.

Like there's there's a lot of that that's going on, and there are so many electronic websites for somebody to go to.

It's really confusing it can be confusing and overwhelming as to what that looks like.

And they they talk about it, it's easy to apply, just click here.

It's easy to apply, just click here.

It's not as easy as it looks, and it's not as easy as it sounds.

So we do our case workers using Nevada Works and Employee Nevada as a good streamline because we know those are reliable.

We do appropriate systems.

We do.

And we have several partners who have different computer rooms and so forth for people to be able to do those applications, and we we help build the resumes with them and stuff like that as well.

And then last for clothing, um, this was actually community members and service providers said that there's no need for improvement.

Um, if there was any improvement, it would be more about doing some targeted messaging about when they're running low on certain sizes of clothing for community donations to be there.

Um, but that was about all that they asked for.

So, any other questions that you have for me?

This is just for a presentation for you to have the information in front of you to help you as you move into the next stages of what you're looking to do.

Anyone else have any more?

Nope.

Okay.

Thank you.

Pretty good on that one.

So we will move on to agenda, it's discussion only.

Yeah.

Um, we're on agenda item 16A for action.

Um, Supervisor Giomi, your disclosure, please.

Uh NRS 281A.420 requires me to disclose a conflict of interest and abstain from voting when I have a disqualifying conflict.

In my private commitment, I serve as a volunteer board member for advocates to win domestic violence, which has been a recipient of CSSG awards in the past.

In addition, I'm employed by Nevada Health Centers, which has also received CSSG funding.

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

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

This agenda item is for the prioritization of awards under this program and may affect how awards are made in the future or whether at all, and that could have an impact on the organizations mentioned previously because a reasonable person in my position may be materially affected by these relationships.

I believe I have a disqualifying conflict, and I will not be voting on this matter.

Okay, thank you.

Yassinia, are you gonna start it off or Sherry?

I'm gonna start it off.

Good morning.

Good morning.

I'm just here for moral support.

Let's see if we can't help Mrs.

Bannabu out a little.

Okay.

So the purpose of today's item is to receive board input on priorities for fiscal year 2027 community support service grant.

Um, no funding decisions are being made today.

Uh the CSSG program has been structured into two funding categories non-competitive and competitive.

The non-competitive program supports ongoing and essential services that the city would otherwise need to provide by partnering with nonprofit organizations.

The city is able to deliver these services in a more cost-effective.

Oh, I didn't know it showed my notes.

Do you guys want me to keep going?

Change it.

Okay.

So during the board retreat in February, uh, we heard that the board would like to transition into a three-year program.

Uh, there are approximately 293,000 um 425 dollars available.

This funding supports both the three-year non-competitive cycle and competitive funding opportunities.

As we move forward, staff also heard the board's direction on um regarding performance metrics, and those will be included in the application and uh reported to the board every six months as requested.

So during the previous five-year funding cycle, the board established priority areas shown here.

Um, and based on those priorities, the city funded several key partners as listed.

Uh, these organizations were selected based on their ability to provide essential services, uh demonstrated impact and alignment with board priorities.

So several programs funded through CSSG either directly support statutory required services or help the city meet broader system obligations.

For example, the city is required under state law to provide core appointed advocacy for children, and CASA provides those services for Carson City, and advocates to end domestic violence fulfills state requirements for 24-hour advocacy for survivors of sexual assault.

Other programs, while not explicitly mandated, provide critical services, for example, community health, I mean, excuse me, community counseling center supports behavioral health tied to treatment for individuals in recovery for substance addiction.

And RSVP provides senior services aligned with state program guidelines.

Additionally, programs such as Meals on Wheels and Ron Wood Family Resource Center provide preventative services that help reduce higher cost outcomes, such as institutional care and justice system involvement.

As the board considers these priorities, staff recommends considering both statutory obligations and programs that provide essential cost uh avoidance services.

Well, some of these services are required or essential.

We also want to ensure the program is responsive to current community needs.

The health department recently completed a social service landscape assessment, which identified several priority areas, including housing, health care, behavioral health, food access, and workforce development.

The assessment also highlighted common themes such as access barriers, including transportation and cost, as well as capacity limitations and the need for coordination across service providers.

While housing identified was identified as a need, staff recognizes that CSSG funding is limited, and a larger scale housing solutions may require separate funding strategies.

Given this, staff is recommending a focus on preventative child and family support services to help stabilize households and keep people from struggling in their current home and address the middle need identified in the assessment.

Workforce development was also identified as a priority in the needs assessment for individuals that are currently employed and seeking to advance their skills and employment opportunities, as many serve services are 9 to 5 and do not offer night or weekend hours.

However, the Carson City Library currently has programs to address this need and are open until 8 p.m.

three days a week and are open to ideas into enhancing programming.

This information is being provided as context for the board as it considers its priorities for fiscal year 2027.

Excuse me.

Based on program, prior program priorities, statutory requirements, and coordination with the health department and the city manager's office.

Staff is presenting the following recommendation recommended priority areas for fiscal year 2027.

These recommendations are intended to serve as a starting point for the board's consideration.

The first category includes the statutory mandated services such as core appointed special advocates, domestic violence advocacy, and expanded to child advocacy efforts, including child forensic interview and advocacy services.

These programs support required city functions.

The second category includes system critical services that are either currently in place or identified through the health needs assessment.

This includes dental care, which has been a long-standingly standing and highly utilized service, particularly as cost continues to increase and the access to insurance is limited due to cost.

The health needs assessment identified transportation as a barrier to accessing health care and getting to the food bank.

Preventative child and family support was identified during the needs assessment as the city works hard to get people housed.

There are those who are deciding between paying rent, utilities, food, and other essentials.

Behavioral and mental health services need to needs assessment identified this again as a cost of this service continues to be high.

It is also important to note that the CSSG program is not intended to address every single community need, but rather support targeted services that could be effectively delivered through nonprofit partners, and staff is seeking the board's direction on whether to move forward with these priorities.

Thank you.

So I think I'd like to start a little bit with there are services that we as the city provide, for instance the child advocacy.

That really, I'm assuming would be through the sheriff's office.

They have a case identified child of issue, and they're going to take it to the child to the advocacy center and have the forensics done.

So that would not be put out to a bid or an RFP.

So I guess I'm a little bit looking as to whether we should first look within the services that we provide, right?

Like I know that Genie's group does some workforce development.

So I think it's difficult for me to say what a split ought to be or what the overall priorities without first obtaining the top three mandatory services that we provide and what dollars that's going to take out of the 293,000.

And because don't we also do some family support activities with juvenile?

So I'm just suggesting that we look internally first, fund those as our mandatory required services, otherwise we wouldn't be doing them as the city.

Then take what's remaining and put it out for the um other items on that list.

If does that make sense what I'm trying to say?

I think you need like put out a two-week, make sure we're funding our own internal needs, and then look to go out to any further community ones.

Because I think the transportation seems like a big issue across all the systems, but it could be that we talk with Chris and RTC about a micro transit that says, okay, here's a 10-person van.

We might even have one, um, a smaller van.

I think we have two smaller vans if my memory serves me, and that maybe we have a pilot program to see if we couldn't do some microtransit work in getting people, and so it'd be a driver that would need to be able to do these on call, you know, appointment things and saying, I don't know.

I what I'm interested in what the rest of you think.

We have purchased vans for some of the nonprofits for the transportation.

Yes, we have.

And so I I feel like maybe we should let them use their staff, who's you know, far less costly than a PERS full-time employee.

Or SP specifically.

To do, yeah, to do some of those seniors.

RSVP does people over the age of 60.

Well, yes.

That I don't I don't believe that's our only transportation issue.

And we don't hire an employee in, we only have contract employees for Jack, just so that you all know.

And the beauty of that is if it doesn't work out, you know, you try it for a year or two, you go, oh, that's not working.

Nobody's availing themselves, or whatever.

I'm just saying I think we should look within first, and then because for instance, meals on wheels.

We just talked about it.

She's got a hundred and some odd ones.

140 on the waiting list or whatever it was it.

Meals on wheels is an important program.

It is community greatly.

It helps a lot in two ways, right?

The mental health of the industry it's amazing what a visit can do that somebody knows, hey, every Monday, Johnny's gonna visit me and I can say hello to somebody.

But I just wonder if we think it's worthy to look within over the next two weeks, and then come back with okay, there's 150,000 left, and then you can go out to um the organizations.

Uh, I think dental services has to be provided in the community.

That isn't anything anyone else does.

Um behavioral health.

So just uh what we're what our plan was, and obviously this can be changed, but our plan was to set the priorities today, get them out to everybody, including our city people that you know, Courtney and um the sheriff's department who could, you know, clear those statutory mandated services.

Um everybody, and then um we would, you know, if it fit in the program, we would send them the application, they would complete it, and and then we would of course have our um application review work group, which we were planning on including at least one of the board members on it.

Uh and we would obviously prioritize the statutory ones first because those are required, they're critical needs, those have to be done.

Um, but then we could look at the rest of them.

The idea is to get this out so that we can have that application process and make it as fair as possible for everybody who needs the dollars.

And we do have a limited amount of dollars.

Well, that's my concern.

I don't like to put something out there that makes them think there's I think your applications come in differently based on the amount of the dollars that are available, and that people design their programs.

Um, let me I can talk about this in two ways.

We could put it out there, and we could prioritize our own first.

I mean, we could put the applications out for everyone to fall within those categories, and then we could put a higher priority on our own services as far as for the work group to you know, more you get an extra bonus scoring if you're one of ours.

Well, I think before we consider applications going out, we need to take a look at exactly what you said, our own internal things that we're doing, and certainly in our workshop, I think the entire board indicated that the priority should be on the statutory requirement stuff.

Um for me, while I believe that's more or less true, I'd like to retract my position a little bit.

Um we always have to be able to look at and understand new information.

And what has come to me recently is uh the sheriff's department's family reunification program.

Um we need to get that funded, and I think we can do that through CSSG.

Um I've had a conversation with Kenny.

In fact, I'm gonna have another conversation with him this afternoon about what that would really do.

You know, let's have an actual plan, let's just not throw something in the fan and see where it goes.

Um also I've had a conversation uh with Allie over at uh juvenile.

Um they have a pretty good plan in place now for family reunification.

Um, but it could certainly need some assistance, and frankly, outside of the statutory stuff, um if we think we're gonna break this cycle of people coming in and out of the system, if we don't put the family back together, we're not gonna break that cycle because that cascades down to the children, and then they're in the cycle.

So I think as a group, we need to identify that family reunification uh within our incarceration facilities needs to become a priority and permanently funded through CSSG, but again, we have to have those conversations, see what that looks like.

Yeah, I think that's where I think we need to point this vote today.

I I think I really do I really do want to see what we have as needs within.

We have all the data collection.

I mean, we have a lot of the elements that that seem to be a little more difficult to obtain for whatever reasons, it doesn't matter, um, versus a captive audience that meals on wheels has or the family reunification has they're much more able to give us direct statistics and are we making a difference?

Are they seeing a reduction in recidivism?

I mean, you even look at the mental health court, right?

That's a huge success on what they're able to do.

And so I don't want to discount services that are in the field, and I think the one area that I'm very interested in is again the transportation is to look at what components, the dental services, because we don't supply those, and so I don't necessarily want to cut them to zero because we uh chew up all the money, um, because I think that unbeknownst to many people an infection in your mouth, and you can you can die from it because you didn't get a two dollar pill to get rid of your infection because you didn't know, but um right.

So I'm very interested in saying I want to look at transportation and dental services and within our mandatory services and our city services first.

I just think we're gonna eat the money up.

I just do with I don't want to forget about what we do with our senior population as well.

RSVP programs important.

I think we have to keep that in mind as well.

There are a lot of things out there that are priorities, so to speak.

And I think if we were to actually look at the schedule, can you there's no way for you to put that up that shows what we funded?

There's a few that I think fit directly into the essential.

Is it 15,000 for SVP for transportation?

I think yeah, it sounds about right.

Something like that.

I'm close, it's in there.

Yeah, let me look.

You know, and we did page 580.

Oh, I see.

I got to 557, so thank you.

Is if we really start to look here and say, where have we been putting our so meals on wheels?

We added, you know, we've been doing 24,000.

And I'm just spitballing again, we're not awarding anything, we're not doing it.

But how much is it gonna cost me to get rid of the wait list?

Is that something that you go, oh my gosh, we're able to serve everyone?

It's probably only going to be a moment in time, of course.

But what a beautiful thing to say that we're able to provide service to all those homebound.

Well, they also get funding from from another source as well.

Um, the supplemental indigent fund sets aside additional money for them.

Um yeah, but that they've got a wait list.

No, no, I understand.

I think there are ways.

I think I think I'd love to talk to Courtney and sit down and figure out a way to solve that because she does she did tell me recently that there was no um poverty level to get that.

So age so in homebound.

Right.

So is it possible that some people have the money that could pay a small fee that could help the others that that can't afford it?

And I don't mind having it's like a it would be like a discussion hopefully with um with Courtney that could help fund some of that program.

Um because we have slowly added money over the years constantly to that program.

The city didn't used to pay anything to it, and then CSSG is paying, and now we've got supplemental indigenous, and so we keep adding, and the wait list keeps growing, and so I I understand it's a problem that and we don't want people you know starving to death, obviously, but um, but there is only 293,000 in this entire CSSG program, so you know, it's such limited funding.

Um $13,791.

That's what RSVP was.

If you look at the 2026 and just run down and say, okay, the same 293,000, and you say I guess what I'm getting to is if we said all of these things on the non-competitives that we had before, there's not much left to be able to meet our program needs, like we don't have child advocacy in here at all.

No, and so that's all I'm saying is I know it's tough, and I know it's tough on us, but we have to decide what those priorities are, and so I I can't go down this same exact path, and we just we just can't go there, and and it's very very difficult.

Um it's just hard, but we're gonna have to to make the tough decisions here, and I want I want to see the required and the services that we want to provide first, but that's just me.

I'm more than happy to listen to do we put them all out and include our departments and have them put it out everywhere, you know, and get all the feedback in so that they maybe only have to do the application process once.

That was kind of what I said.

And then we can prioritize potentially our own.

What's your guys' flavor kind of thinking on that?

Lisa, do you have a preference?

Put it out for everything that's on the recommendation and and include all of our own departments and put it out as one.

That is my preference.

That's my preference.

And then we see all the information at the same time, and it it's easier to then determine the priorities priorities.

But I think we're all again recognizing potentially we're recognizing our own services.

We made our octopus too big, we need to retract it.

Well, yeah.

Well, and I also go ahead, Lisa.

Sorry.

So in turn in determining services and determining the services that we are required through NRS, um of those will impact some of the other programs.

Uh, you know, the cost of uh that does impact some of the parenting skills or the conflict management, that kind of thing that leads to some of the um problems like with the family reunification or why families aren't unified or aren't together at the moment.

You know, it's not about putting families back together, it's about how do we help them be successful.

What are what are the um problems that they're facing that has caused uh you know kids being taken out of homes, that kind of thing.

Okay, let me take some public comment um on this item.

Um so in case there's somebody else might have a great idea for us, Mr.

French.

Thank you.

Of course I'll thank you both.

I'm sorry that my issue.

Denny French Carson City.

Um listen to are you at an uh uh mayor at a program where you ask specifically for the individuals there to s let you know their specific services so that you could decide um were they fulfilling a statutory or statutory or uh a convenience type deal and how to fit that in.

And and quite frankly, they didn't come up with real answers for you, so that was disappointing.

But I'm also concerned about the fact that um dentals not really been on the availability through the city as much as I'd like to see it because I know several people that I know that are living on the streets, couldn't face getting into a job until they could face taking care of their face or their teeth, and also the mental and emotional stresses and infection causes an individual besides the actual death that could occur from it, um, that those things I think should be prior provided some priority.

Also, transportation has been an issue with those few that I've been able to do any kind of outreach, even just letting them use my phone.

Uh transportation has been huge.

And um being able to be eligible for that transportation means it has to be a medical or this or that, and and that's very hard as far as changing bus routes and such like that.

Um I think maybe they could maybe reroute or reconsider their routes.

If in fact they don't have people to pick up in certain areas, maybe they could change those, but to stop the regular routes right now would be really tough on anyone that's not able to follow that for health reasons, for shopping reasons, uh for food pantries.

I'd I have some suggestions on that, but I'll talk to um uh Ms.

Freeman later on those.

Um the main thing is I didn't get a chance to bring that up.

Um, but um I appreciate the fact that you only have a fine set of funding, and if the C I'm sorry, I want to make sure I get the lettering right, the CSSG funds could be expanded somehow.

We could look for that or at least decide to narrow our list down.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there any other public comment?

Okay.

So we're thinking we'll just put the application out for everyone and include our own departments to recognize that they can apply to so they put a program together, or they already have programs, but that they could apply for this.

And I want to say I certainly agree with Sherry that I'd like for you to explore the opportunities, or maybe I'd even love to have a meeting with Courtney to understand the components of her federal requirements versus, like you said, because I know they accept dollars when people walk into the right, they take donations, and if you're of a certain age, if you're under 60, you pay six dollars.

I mean, so I I think there's some opportunities for us to put some things together.

So I agree it's not a I think we also have a meeting with Joy next week to talk about the workforce because I know she's got programs in place, and um I don't know that people know about them, so maybe it's just an advertising thing where we just need to let the community know.

Um I don't uh we have to ask ourselves here.

I don't see that we put workforce in the priorities.

We did not.

We did not, and uh and I don't think with the limited dollars, unless we don't get enough applications here.

I don't think I'm interested in workforce with these dollars because I believe they can go to Nevada.

I think there's stuff out there, yes, but you're correct that their case manager needs to be doing a good referrals for them.

So I'm not interested at this time, adding workforce is one of the critical needs.

But okay, I'm just making sure.

So I I think that's a good list when we call it preventative child and family support services.

I want to make sure that that does include reunification coming from the jail, coming from juvenile ride that's a broad enough, just making sure we're all on the same page as to what this means.

Yeah, well, and we were thinking it could fit that middle that she was talking about of a housing where they're you know couldn't afford food because they're trying to pay their rent kind of thing.

There could be a program there that nonprofits might be able to support families that way, or the reunification.

I mean, I thought it was kind of broad, but at the same time, there are things that we need.

Right.

Um yeah, so that's what we came up with.

And and feel free to change them or reduce them, or I mean, this is your grant, so let us know what you want your priorities to be.

That's what we came up with, but feel free to tweak them.

I I think this is kind of uh a little bit what I spoke to earlier about austerity measures.

We're at a point where we have to decide what really we can do for the community, right?

And it's pretty obvious that in a lot of cases, uh, as has been pointed out, we don't know that some of these programs we're paying for or getting the job done because we we don't have that mechanism um to gather that data, but we can know for fact what we're doing from the inside, and that and that's why um I kind of look at this as a practice run at austerity measures.

We definitely heard you at the February meeting, and we will be tweaking the um data requirements that the nonprofits or our own departments have to provide to us so that we can report back to you every six months.

I I just think that it's so important, and and I think that advisor shooty was correct in something she said too is some data is hard to capture, right?

The unknown is the part how do you put a number to it or a you know, you go, oh no, if we took if if we looked at Jack and said, okay, this route has 10 riders, so we did the math, and it would shock you.

Well, I'll just laugh and say my husband says, get rid of that and give them a taxi because it's a ten dollar ride versus potentially a $50 ride.

You know, so again, what are you doing to accomplish the the need, the service?

And that's I think what we're all after is are we provide getting the best service for the limited dollars that we have?

And so I absolutely adore every single one of our nonprofit service providers.

I've never seen set chart, right?

I Lisa and I attend a lot of meetings.

Um there is no doubt in my mind that their heart is in the right place.

They're providing services that are needed.

They do have a difficulty isolating sharing data.

Um and so what becomes difficult is for me to understand.

Are we making a difference?

Are we putting the dollar in the correct place?

Um and I've been honest with each and every one of them, right?

That okay, what did that do for us?

And so I really look forward to that.

But is there the behavioral health?

Um do we look at that as part of your it really incorporates within potentially the preventive child and family support.

What what are we thinking in the behavioral health arena?

What have we funded?

If I'm looking at this, community counseling.

When you're considering CCC centers, the 20,000 we usually give them.

Yes.

Okay.

And I think I believe that's the one that quartz works with um pretty extensively to help with their own.

It's two pronged, right?

Because it's intentional and mental health.

Yes.

Okay, exactly.

I just want to say, so you're saying that includes dependencies.

Right.

Okay.

Just so again, I understand what's in the category so that we're all on the same page together of what we're expecting to get back.

So does that work for everyone?

Yeah.

You have enough direction to move forward.

Yes, I think we do.

Any other comment, Lisa?

Good.

You have to tell us if you're having fun.

Yeah.

I am having fun, but you saw the folks walking behind me.

They're off to go snorkeling and do some other amazing activities.

So get going so you can get going.

I got it.

Okay.

So you have enough uh anything else that we know this is great.

I just want to remind everybody.

We need those numbers.

We need that data.

We've been asking for this for years, not months.

Years.

Right.

I want to see those numbers.

Right.

Understand.

Yeah.

I think we were an action item, so it doesn't still doesn't require a motion.

You don't need to do a motion.

No, okay.

I don't.

Um you've got enough on the record to be able to uh move forward.

And that solves that.

Okay.

Um we're on to agenda item 17, which is our non-action items.

Does anyone have any communication they want to share with anyone?

Uh I'll just make a brief comment.

I I don't want um Dustin's 30 years to go unnoticed.

So I just I want to thank him for you know, many, many years ago.

Um probably too many, but close to 30, probably or more.

Uh we started a hazmat program here in Carson City, and um, you know, one of the things that we responded to uh was biological events, and we we I mean we had a lot to learn.

Yeah, you took a bunch of firemen and made them chemists essentially.

Um it really made my brain hurt.

Um because being an adult learner with science is hard.

But um I I'll tell you uh there were so many people in the background that run sung heroes that didn't get the recognition that that we got as firefighters, and Dustin was one of those.

We we had developed a great partnership as so many different agencies in the city do that people don't realize that work together behind the scenes to to benefit this community.

And um I I can't uh underemphasize the contribution that Dustin made with his knowledge about uh biological issues and and all of the white powder calls that we went on and uh we were for a while there with all of that hoop a log going on.

Uh we were chasing our tails, and and everywhere we showed up uh with lights and siren, uh Dustin came right behind us um and really uh supported us.

Um, and I and I know that continued even after I left.

So uh Dustin, your contributions have been uh mighty.

Uh they've been strong over the years.

Uh you're going to be very hard to replace um and uh I just wish you well.

Thank you for your time and your commitment to this community and the coworkers that you uh benefited over the years.

Thank you.

I would like to echo those sentiments from Supervisor Giomi.

Dustin, we've worked together your entire career, as Stacey has, and been on a number of problematic situations that you were able to resolve.

And quite honestly, the value that you provide to the organization and to the community is very understated.

And I I want to commend you for all of your hard work over the years.

And you've done things that you know people just don't understand.

It's hard to explain, but it's so valuable.

Everything that you do.

And you're a professional in your field, and you've always been professional in everything that we've done.

And I greatly appreciate all the help that you've given to us over the years.

And I'm glad that you're able to retire.

I applaud you, that's awesome.

But boy, what a loss for the city.

Enjoy your retirement.

I still want to use the denied button.

Again, I can make the stamp super big if it'll work.

But thank you, Dustin.

They said it all.

Thank you.

Okay.

Anyone else?

No.

All right.

Then we'll go to our final public comment.

Mr.

French.

Denny French, Carson City.

Um, for shooty shape's sake, I'll try to make this this short.

Um, first off, I want to acknowledge uh Stephanie Hicks.

Um, made it to the 2026 um chambers, a woman of distinction list.

And I think she should be acknowledged.

I I don't always know what a lot of people do, but after reading over the bit that they had about what she's into and what she's been involved with, it deepens my appreciation for her efforts, and I appreciate her.

And Dustin, I I'm I'm sorry, I can't catch the last name, but I'm sorry I didn't get a chance to meet you during your service time and that you're leaving.

Up uh would have appreciated knowing all that you've done.

Thank you.

Um, the next thing is I would like to say on the austerity type situation is that I'm so not sorry, but uh this uh short-term uh rental situation is gonna require some more employees for the um building um planning commission.

Um yeah, hopes Sullivan is put in for staff um monies or money be put towards the budget towards new employees.

And I'm going, what the heck are we doing?

Are we able to really sustain some of these new hirees?

Well, I think that they've needed uh code enforcement uh people for quite a while that added that this uh new consideration about short term and all of the considerations.

My goodness, there are people, I don't think they need an S ethics list, and I don't think that they need all of the requirements other than uh maybe a business license and a few required uh who's gonna show up in 30 minutes as opposed to 60 and such like that.

We should limit that so that we don't have to be looking over their shoulders.

If they're not good neighbors, their neighbors will let us know.

And we already have things enforced.

I do think there should be uh consideration for a noise enforcement level so that you can actually, you know, not just hey, you're reading your book out loud, it's bugging me.

Thank you very much.

And um austerity is uh what we've got to consider.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there any other public comment?

No.

Okay.

Then if there is no objection, miss anything, just in case.

Sometimes you flip through these pages and oh, I missed a little lineup there.

Okay, then we're adjourned and every happy Easter.

Right?

Happy Easter.

Yeah, get some egg hunting in this weekend.