Recording in progress.

Good afternoon.

We're gonna go ahead and we're gonna call to order the regional planning governing board for Thursday, February 12th, 2026, and we'll start with roll call.

Diane Vanderwell.

Here.

Kathleen Taylor.

Here.

Brandy Anderson.

Here.

Clara Andreola.

Present.

Mike Clark.

Present.

Naomi Dewar.

Absent.

Jean Herman.

Absent.

Ed Lawson.

Here.

Devin Reese.

Here.

Joe Rodriguez.

Here.

And non-voting member Beth Smith.

Here.

We have a quorum.

Great.

Thank you.

Next move along to salute the flag.

Uh President Smith, if you'll do that for us.

Thank you, Chairman.

I pledge allegiance to the United States America.

Underall.

Thank you.

Next, I'll move to approval of the agenda.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Okay, I have a first and a second.

Any discussion?

Okay.

Seeing none, please vote.

Aye.

Aye.

Great.

Thank you.

Next we'll move on to four approval of the amendment.

Uh if there's no additions or any suggestions, if I can please have a motion.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Okay, I have a first and a second.

Any further discussion?

Seeing none, please vote.

All right.

Aye.

Thank you.

Next move along to five.

Public comment.

Do we have any public comment?

We have none.

Thank you.

Next, we'll move along to the consent agenda.

If anybody are is there anybody that wants to remove for discussion the consent agenda?

If not, um does anybody have any comments?

I will allow comments on the consent without pulling it.

I have comment, Chair Vanderbel.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I would like to thank you and also Vice Chair Taylor for the openness to the consideration of my idea to have an extended multi-year contract with Director Smith.

And I'm very, very glad to see you committed to it for the years to come.

So thank you to all of you.

Thank you.

Any further comments?

Okay, seeing none, if I can please have a motion.

Second.

Okay, I have a first and a second.

Any further discussion?

Okay, seeing none, please vote.

All right.

Thank you.

Next we move along to seven.

Business of the day.

A is president a presentation and discussion regarding the implementation status of the district wide 2023 facility modernization plan and development of the administrative facility at modernization plan.

Director Smith.

Thank you so much for having me here today.

Um and talk about really how our partnerships have really made this possible.

This is kind of uh an agenda for today, uh, where we've been where we're where we're going and why this matters.

Um again, where we are today, I feel like the story wants to begin back in 2016 or so.

Um, really on the passage of what at the time was known as WC One.

Um this was uh ballot measure that was established on a number of key issues and primary platforms as detailed on this slide.

I want to highlight the element uh in the middle proposed to voters without a sunset.

That was one of the most challenging and bold aspects of that particular ballot measure that resonates very much to this day, as well as the final bullet mentioning of core school investments.

We're going to talk about some of the schools that we've constructed and in growth areas of our community and how we are still pursuing those investments into our core schools and what that looks like today.

But just fast forwarding, like your favorite cooking show.

We passed the ballot measure, and we've now today constructed and opened 10 new schools and five major additions, detailed on the right-hand side.

There is so many stories.

There are so many stories, and uh lives changed and improved as a relative result of each and every one of those.

I want to share just a couple of those anecdotes, but that's the roster and growing.

These are some images from our newest elementary schools.

We've got a number of those today, and those really, you know, want to be highlighted by some of those messages on the top, access to daylight, improve safety and security, and all of those types of spaces.

One of the anecdotes I wanted to lift up has to do with our newest Jaywood Raw elementary school.

Um recounting in my own mind what that uh project was like to develop, including drainage ways and NABs, um, and even a little brief intersection with our own PF 8 or whatever it is uh regarding pedestrian access and adjacent roadways.

We know our new elementary schools are, you know, involving some of our smallest and most precious uh students, and so how we interact with the existing and surrounding community was a huge part of the success story at Jaywood Raw.

And um CEO Cersei, so we're gonna actually tag team a bit on this presentation.

What I wanted to offer for this particular slide is really the partnership that you're going to hear throughout with um all of our organizations and working with the school district over the years and the way that we've really evolved how we do our projects.

Um, one point of praise that I'd like to offer related to Jaywod Raw goes to Councilmember Dorr.

She very appropriately noticed that there were some pedestrian improvements that we could make with that project, not just on the traffic side, but for our students and families who were walking.

She joined me in actually almost getting hit by all the cars that were driving by in the middle of the walkways.

And we were particularly grateful that you pointed out some of those improvements after the opening of the school.

We subsequently worked in partnership with the city of Reno to actually install additional flashers that the school district installed.

And then beyond that, the City of Reno recently committed to all of the flasher and pedestrian improvements, that 1.1 million dollars that you've really invested in the grant that you had.

So just really wanted to point that out to really name it to really thank you, Councilmember Dorr, and of course, all of our City of Reno representatives here, ways that we have worked together within our government agencies to make all of these projects and the process so much better.

Well, thanks.

I'll interrupting your presentation, but thank you.

But it was really, as you know, all about the students and the fact we could see the issues that were fixes available, and we really had to dig deep to fund that project.

But this other, as you pointed out, we were able to get a grant to, and we are doing like almost every school right now in Reno that does not have pedestrian flashers or overhead right now.

So it's kind of you know, it really kind of gathered its own momentum because really I gotta compliment you because of your literature and willingness to step up and recognize that these kind of pedestrian safety improvements are actually part of building the school, and so need to be funded with WC1 too.

You know, in other words, it's part and parcel of the whole thing.

So appreciate that.

I'm glad for the uh digression.

There, like I said, is a wonderful story associated with every one of these schools.

Um, focusing a little bit on the human element today, across all of those new schools, approximately 20% of our students and staff experienced their academic day in one of those schools today as we speak.

And I emphasize staff a little bit as well, because you know, while our first, second, and third priority is always our students, you know, staff, how they um are presented with the tools to do their jobs, the environments in which they work.

This is a retention and recruitment element, and it improves ultimately the ability of our teachers to do their jobs.

This slide uh highlights our middle schools and some important uh achievements associated with the opening of those schools are listed on the top, not the least of which includes culture and community.

And I wanted to talk about uh tell the story, uh retell the story of Marcy Hurz, talking about unincorporated Washoe County and what at the time was known as Arrow Creek Middle School, our acquisition of that property from the U.S.

Forest Service, the community engagement that ensued.

Uh I recall being denied a grading permit by the uh Board of Adjustment in this very room once upon a time.

It was no small effort, but notably uh the project evolved and was improved through that process.

We were able to achieve access points off of Arrow Creek Parkway, preserving the functionality of that arterial.

We were able to install overhead flashers and an upgraded signalized traffic intersection there at Arrow Creek Arrow Creek and uh Wedge or so, and ultimately bring that needed project to completion in partnership with Washoe County and our entire communities.

Uh great to look back on.

You can see those images from Sky Ranch, Desert Skies was a wonderful story uh to be through as well.

Um, O'Brien and soon to open Vaughn Middle School.

These are investments in our humans, of course, also a very literal investment financially into our community.

These are real numbers, turning those taxpayer dollars right back around into our architects, engineers, contractors, and countless other partners who helped bring these projects to life.

Um, I remember specific uh, you know, media interviews where we talked to one of the workers on the Proctor Hug site who graduated from Procter Hug and uh got that emotional investment as well.

It's been a boon for our community and every bit of the type of investment that was uh aspired to during the ballot initiative.

These are images from our high schools, um, as you saw on the slide before, an aerial image from uh what is now Proctor R.

Hug High School up at Wild Creek.

But you know, once upon a time, that project uh, you know, was a real head scratcher.

This was a complicated entitlement project and process, one that uh was really only made possible through the partnerships with the staff at the City of Sparks.

Um it wasn't clear exactly how this uh should transpire.

We had many meetings and conversations with regional planning as well.

Um being consummated in the form of a development agreement, kind of a familiar tool, but one uh that was atypically applied to a school district project and led to, I think, you know, at least it was born out of the spirit of collaboration and allowed us to get to yes on a project that wasn't exactly clear how we got from the starting point to completion.

So these images are from the new Proctor Hug High School as well as a couple from the new Debbie Smith CTE Academy High School.

We're gonna talk about that a little bit more later.

Over this entire time, uh completing this work is one thing, but doing it in a way that ensures and even grows the community's trust.

Um, several of you are sitting members of the Capital Funding Protection Committee or have been in the past.

Um, and this is something that is equally as important as delivering on the work I feel.

This committee has provided the community and the school district with a layer of oversight and guidance that is arguably unprecedented across other agencies.

The level of authority that the board has actually granted that uh committee is significant, and we treat that with the utmost seriousness and have since its inception nearly 10 years ago.

This was the image I wanted to really uplift the partnership with the city of Sparks here because you know, this image, many of you may recall was the original uh site layout for the new high school at Wild Creek.

And it really uh, I mean, you can see the high high school down there on the flat bottom near McCarran.

What evolved was because of that engagement with regional, that engagement with the surrounding community with the city of Sparks and actually Reno and NDOT and many partners, including the Or Didge Company and all of the above.

It's fun to go back and uh recall that, although you know it was intense at the time, but really to recognize that it was only because all of the people that were involved and many more's willingness to partner that we were able to have the kind of impact and final outcome that we did.

So these are this is still just a history lesson to inform where we are going.

I'm gonna jump in on that one.

Going back to that previous slide with the Wild Creek.

So I have been lucky enough to serve on this body for almost five years.

And when I joined this body and we had the subcommittee, one of the things that was most important to me when I understood the feedback that was coming to the school district.

This whole presentation and the work of WC One is not just something that we have accomplished alone.

It was also based on feedback that we received about how the school district could be a better partner with the cities with the county.

And it really came about through this project.

And in particular, I would really like to recognize Mayor Lawson on this.

Well, no, but I'm I'm gonna I'm gonna get to it.

So that's how I met you.

Uh in through this whole process, and I understand now for serving on the school board as many years as I have, that when you're truly a public servant, one of the most difficult parts of our job is calling out constructive feedback, naming hey team, we can be better.

And when you really love the organizations and the communities you serve, that can be some of the most difficult conversations you have.

And what I really appreciate was Mayor Lawson, also former Commissioner Von Hartang, also Councilmember Doer in particular, really said to the school district, we love what you are accomplishing, and we see ways that we can and should improve in our partnership.

And what I want you to know, Mayor Lawson, is that this was something we really took to heart.

The work that you see, the way that our teams work together in the planning, the improvement on each of the sites really began because you had the courage to say, hey team, we really can and should be better.

And while at the time it may not have felt like something that we or many recognized as a positive, all these years later, you were right, and we are better for it, and we have so many successes to show.

And so I just really wanted to take a moment, because it is very rare where any elected official gets told uh back then that hey, you were pointing out the right areas for improvement, but you were.

And I personally think that the Washoe County School District and the way that all of our organizations work together really emanated from that.

So you have my thanks on behalf of the district.

I have another suggestion for it.

Well, here always open.

Again, this informs our next chapter.

So that listening part, that continuous improvement part really informed the 2022-2023 era, where the school district asked those types of questions.

Where do we need to go next?

What do the core school investments want to look like?

Recognizing that building these new schools largely in upper middle class suburban areas of growth was only just the beginning of what WC One Canon was intended to bring to our community.

So what became known as a facility modernization plan was ultimately approved by our board in 2023, following nearly 18 months of extensive and diverse community engagement.

And really, this is uh a plan uh like TMRPA is deeply familiar with, uh a robust one, an ambitious one that is essentially summarized in three major categories of interventions at our schools.

This is intended to bring our schools up to a level of parity with our newest schools so that nearly every student has an opportunity to experience have their learning journey inside a school with comparable spaces and assets and resources, regardless of where you live.

Again, simplifying into simplifying the plan into its three basic elements will start with modernization.

So as you might understand, uh, we're not demolishing the school, it's got dramatic useful life left in it, but we want to add on to it and change the shape of its interior.

The images on the right are of Swope Middle School, most of you are familiar with what it looks like today, but that's a great example of how we kept the bones, improved the existing structure and added on to it to create a modern middle school experience.

Not the same as, but similar to and equitable with our newest middle school construction.

Of course, reconstruction, uh, like you've seen at the O'Brien campus, like you're seeing now at the Vaughn campus, and we'll see elsewhere, uh, brand new school on the existing facility where one existed for centuries uh decades previously.

And the third chapter of the FMP includes repurposing.

Honestly, many of our schools are deeply underutilized and beyond their useful life and looking at ways to not only serve all of our students and staff and more modern, effective buildings, but doing so in a way that's appropriately efficient, not only for taxpayer dollars, but really concentrating our adult human resources in and around our students, actually improving the learning experience that way.

So, as with all of these projects, it represents tremendous amounts of change.

Even our new schools in uh constructing subdivisions involve tremendous amounts of change to our community.

We've become fairly well established, growing every time in how we engage with our community through some of these formal channels and some of our informal channels.

Each time we deliver these projects, learning how to message and engage with our community at the site level and in and through their networks has been much very effective each time we grow.

Noting that again, this is a plan and that each and every one of these projects will take into consideration the unique needs of their surrounding communities, converse with those communities, funnel up through multiple public approvals before actually going out to construction.

You know, somehow I missed the uh TMRPA on this particular slide, but you know, I I think it's worth noting that these FMP projects, you know, by and large have been informed or integrated into our facility master plan, you know, which also becomes part of the regional plan conformance and whatnot.

Really the point here is just to emphasize that every one of these projects go through the same community engagement, internal oversight, and entitlement process with the cities and counties before we go to construction.

Some of these highlights you're familiar with, and I'd love to talk about each or any of these as we go forward.

The schools named on the top of this slide are projects that have some level of approvals and progress going forward towards a modernization on those campuses.

Matthews highlighted there on the left and booth are both underway in varying degrees, anticipated for completion and opening in the 27-28 school year.

Again, we're keeping those existing schools and we're looking for targeted construction solutions to modernize and improve those existing buildings and campuses.

Second chapter, reconstruction.

I mentioned some of the uh I mentioned Vaughn earlier, but Echo Loader was just recently awarded for construction uh by our school board and is anticipated to begin construction shortly and open for the 27-28 school year as well.

Vaughn, hopefully, many of you are familiar with, if you've driven down Vassar any time recently, is nearing completion actually.

Uh so we're really looking forward to the end of the spring semester and a lot of celebratory events as we transition from the end of this school year, opening that school beginning of 26-27 next school year.

Same schedule for the new STED elementary school and others that are planned on that slide.

And the third element of the FMP includes the repurposing or closing and repurposing of our existing schools.

So there's an extensive process required by law and deep care and thoughtfulness that can and has been put forward towards any of these decisions.

The FMP names a large number of schools for potential repurposing.

To date, this school board has taken the necessary steps to activate this process across the six elementary schools on the timelines listed on this slide.

Those are just the first steps in this process.

All along, the board through the FMP and staff have committed to a trade-up scenario, ensuring that it's students and staff are insured a healthy and respectful and positive transition to whatever school or uh building they end up in.

Um, and further that we seek to repurpose these schools in a way that continues to provide value to that community, whether it's through district use, whether it's through use with another partner partner in one shape or another, or whether it is through a property transaction, that process is still under development, but our commitment to serving that community through that property, just in a different manner, is really at the core of what we're trying to achieve on those sites.

This is an infographic that we've created to try and illustrate the transition.

Um, you know, if you're not familiar with these schools in particular, listed veterans and Corbett are approved to close in the 27-28 school year.

I mentioned loader undergoing complete reconstruction, booth ongoing modernization, all to coincide with the 27-28 school year.

We're going through the rezoning process as we speak with that community and fundamentally focusing on that top line bullet, investing in student success, recognizing that this is going to be significant and impactful change that will need to be authored as a community for years to come.

But several major steps have been initiated.

And honestly, you know, as difficult as change can be, that's where looking back and seeing the hard work, how the change can positively impact the community is sort of the vision that we want to convey as we're taking on these hard conversations of change in these communities.

That's just one example.

Um, this is a recent uh website that we stood up.

Um, it's kind of our landing page for this change and this work, including opportunities for community engagement, lots of FAQs and things of that nature.

Um, just wanted to really spotlight that because it is so important that we are able to offer avenues for communication uh through a variety of channels.

So, with this repurposing work, I wanted to circle back and try and tell a little bit more of a regional story.

I mentioned sort of groups of schools interconnected.

We started with individual projects.

We talked about how individual partnerships have made them greater.

And I wanted to come back to uh Proctor Hug and talk about how the finished product there up on the hill made possible really by moving that school campus north on the golf course, the preservation of the balance, the clubhouse, the driving range, the short course, all of that was made possible not only in part by the relocation of the site plan, but the stewardship of the Washoe County to preserve the proceeds from that land transaction, commit those to reinvestment through the operator, through the first T, back into that, and you know, perpetuating public golf at that property in a way that we didn't really see possible back in 2017.

That of course, all then beget the creation of the and the transformation of the old campus into the Debbie Smith CTE high school.

Hopefully, hopefully, all of you have had a chance to be there.

That image on the right is a photo from the ribbon cutting ceremony.

That project, that uh that project is quite a story in and of itself.

Um, but really where I think this slide wants to take us is what these projects together in partnership with our community have created.

Really, that line, you know, these projects can be catalysts for greater change across our community.

There's so many stories to tell on this one.

And so on that note, uh I also want to recognize that one of my colleagues has joined us.

So we have in the audience our trustee, Dr.

Diane Nicolette from District G.

She's here for today's presentation as well.

So thank you so much for being here.

So, Debbie Smith CTE, uh, our very first high school named after a woman and named after the senator that brought us WC One.

The Debbie Smith CTE Academy is truly a marks a change carried on by AACT High School.

It's where we're educating our future farmers, our future educators, engineers, and I have a gift for everyone.

So, in the spirit of the season, our students from the animal sciences and natural resources classes, they're doing a fundraiser to actually raise money for their future farmers of America and future business leaders of America, national competitions.

And so before everybody leaves today, I have a handmade gift from one of the students for each of you, along with the TMRPA staff.

Whether you keep it yourself or whether you pay it forward to someone else that you really care about, we have a gift from the students as a sign of thanks.

So you can take home a little bit of our children's CTE talent with you today.

Save me 50 bucks.

Yeah, Joe's thinking the same thing.

Thanks for the reminder.

Guys, that that is just an illustration of what's possible.

I want to take that context and try to apply it.

I mentioned Vaughn before, I briefly mentioned Loader as well.

We're looking to completely reconstruct the Pine campus into a new elementary school that's going to impact that community so deeply, as well as modernizing the booth campus.

Those far four stars represent those locations on the map on the right.

That's great.

That's incredible.

That's really exciting.

But what I want us all to stitch together and to tell our colleagues and networks is what else is happening in that community.

We talked directly about the impact to students, to staff, maybe even this ripple effects into those communities.

But what about these other major projects in that immediate vicinity?

And what about the small business owner?

And what about the other public works projects within this immediate area?

If I'm in Ward 3, I need to know about this because this community is on the rise.

That's what we want to try to expand the perception and the messaging around.

This is the other illustration that I I think has a lot of potential, highlighting trainer, Sparks Middle School, Matthews, and Sparks High School, those stars all up on the map.

But not only linking those individual projects together with the Audi Boulevard improvements of the RTC, with the tremendous change that the generator project is bringing to that community, with projects from the children's cabinet and the food bank, the boys and girls club is right in that vicinity, and probably so many additional nonprofit, private, and public partners who have a vested interest in that community who are actively looking to invest, recognizing that these projects are significant and impactful in and of themselves.

But when we work together, the collaborative efforts will almost certainly create a change that are greater than the sum of its parts.

I've spent the entire presentation talking about our impact to students and staff for a very important reason.

All of our non non-school facilities were omitted from our FMP work.

We focus first, second, and third on how can we serve our students.

But it is absolutely true that as one of the largest employers in Washoe County, uh, that hundreds of non-school based staff uh serve the district towards our students every day, not inside of schools.

And so currently we are developing an AFMP or an administrative facilities master plan.

This is an update uh last presented to our board in October, talking about, you know, what the organization might best look like in order to serve our schools rather than a distributed model as it exists today, more of a consolidated model with modern facilities that invite the public to participate in our process to engage with the services that we offer and allow our staff to better serve our schools.

This is in progress, but another excerpt from that October meeting highlighted the recommended finalists, if you will, for that consolidated location, either at the current Ninth Street property, not far from here that all of you are familiar with, or perhaps on the Corbett and Wooster properties, as we mentioned earlier, Corbett is slated for closure in the 27-28 school year.

So we're looking in depth at what a consolidated headquarters facility might look like on those properties and hoping to take a first next step towards a site selection later this year.

Those are also very important elements to the work that we do.

None of this is made possible, or none of this is possible without the passage of WC One.

And I said, as I said, the courage of the community to pass that measure without a sunset.

This is what the next chapter of WC One is intended to look like.

Much more complex, much richer for the lessons learned, for the community engagement, and hopefully in a way that will lift all elements of our community because, in my deeply biased opinion, no single piece of infrastructure, as much as I love roads and bridges and sewer infrastructure, has a greater impact on a community than a school.

And in this community, we are making that investment, and where it can lead us uh is really limited by our own willingness to kind of partner and lift that up.

So thanks again for the opportunity to tell this story.

It would only be a fraction of the potential that it is without the type of partnership and leadership that all of us in this room have demonstrated.

Thank you.

Any answer Circe, is there any uh comments, suggestions?

Um, and I have I have one more as part of the closing, and this may be a detail that some on this day is do not know.

But WC One here locally was preceded by a particularly tenacious group of moms who led an initiative called the Save Our Schools.

And one of those core moms is sitting right next to me, and that is Reno City Councilwoman, Brandy Anderson.

She was one of that core group of moms who led this on a grassroots level.

So to have this presentation to tell this story and to sit next to one of those moms that actually brought this to fruition is incredibly important.

And I just wanted to make sure that I recognized her publicly.

Is it okay if I if I go right ahead?

Okay.

So thank you for saying that.

And I just want to say that this is the first time I've cried in my public service so far.

Um I'm kind of annoyed with how emotional I've gotten watching your your presentation.

Um, I would say that I have been kind of a pain in the butt community organizer and advocate most of my life, but WC1 is where I really cut my teeth and had real mature, honest, hard conversations with people in this community that were um comfortable being in their lanes of each of us just focusing on what we focused on, and we weren't collectively solving problems.

WC One was a way where our community got vulnerable and humble with each other, and we decided that we were going to work together on something that felt like it was huge and hard to accomplish, but it was for our children and the educators that were ushering them into the future.

And I'm sorry that I'm getting a little bit weird about this, but I pushed people that were so uncomfortable in being public into the public.

I their children, their children told stories.

There were, you know, ward six, I have to say, um, benefited the most out of the gate from WC One's passage because we got the extension of Damani Ranch.

We got two new elementary schools, Depoli Elementary or middle school was able to get some very um important technical upgrades that we needed.

So we really did um locally benefit from that, but Debbie Smith elementary, or I mean um CTE is definitely you know, WC One was something about just doing what we needed to do on behalf of our students, but Debbie Smith CTE Academy is what we can imagine on behalf of our community, and now we've gotten past what we owe our community and what we can actually achieve for our community.

So I want to say thank you because I know that I I challenged and I um offended, and I you know, I worked through a lot of hard conversations along with a lot of other people that bent over backwards to create partnerships to make this happen.

Thank you, and thank you.

Um I'm sorry I'm not being very graceful about this, but today feels like a surprising win in a time where this community we're we're struggling to find ways to achieve goals, and this is WC One was what it was a organizational coming together of this community that we need to replicate together for every challenging infrastructure and community service that we have because this is something that we can build on and really be um just break through all the barriers that we need for our community.

So sorry, I got a little bit.

I was surprised by how emotional I got by this, and um, thank you for indulging my emotion.

And thank you for your recognization.

Mayor Lawson, you want to go ahead.

So uh you will hear when and I know we're getting around to doing the reverb of the inner city schools, and you know, a lot of them in Sparks.

There's one of the suggestions, and I think I've told you this for years now, but I'd like to see queuing on campus where possible.

Uh Dilworth is a great example.

That is a 30 mile an hour road that is merely a suggestion that it's generally double that.

So, and you have the majority of those Dillworth kids that are going to the north, so they're crossing Prater, the the large part of them.

The same thing with uh Drake on or Alex Maxwell on Rock.

There's that's a street that 25 miles an hour is merely a suggestion.

And with the trees and the and most of the kids coming to from the high density housing to the west are crossing Rock Boulevard every day.

So those those were in Green Bray Elementary.

I just I don't throw all these in there while I'm at it, but they park all of their staff parks over in uh Sparks Christian Fellowship parking lot.

What happens if somebody takes that over and says, uh, you no longer get the park here?

Uh that is a real possibility.

So I'm just having you guys think a little bit for the future and uh deal with probably the biggest one because it's right next to City Hall, and getting to see kids coming and going to school every day is a big deal for me.

And you know, we just had uh a kid hurt on Rock Boulevard on a scooter hit by a car.

Um so I I wanted to encourage you guys to look outside of the schools and look towards the paths.

How what's the path where these kids come to school?

Because the last thing we're ever want is to have the death of one of our kids.

And if I could add uh Madam Sure, sure.

Um I I want to really support the mayor in this because this is exactly exactly what happened at Jaywood Raw.

The kids are living on one side of a four-lane uh you know, um Rio Wrangler that that didn't have places to cross, and they have to cross every single day.

And it was it wasn't um within the three blocks of the campus, but it's where they all had to cross the same kind of point you're making.

Uh just seemed incredibly dangerous to have to have your population on one side of a major road and your school on the other.

It just just is not good.

So we got to put all those energies into making sure these kids are safe.

Absolutely.

And we also have a lot of parents that drop their kids off.

So the queuing helps to keep the streets free.

Exactly.

Keep them from parking in front of their neighbors' yards.

Uh Bohatch was comes to mind.

I get a call on that one quite often about they're parked in front of my driveway again.

Mayor, okay.

Yep.

So those are just I want you guys to just think about that for the future.

Because you will get to think about it when you kind of sparked for a permit.

Yeah.

Well, I'll jump in on that just a moment.

That's also where, for example, the school district really appreciates the partnership at the city of Reno, um, because we do have spheres of impact where the school district is particularly responsible.

And then, for example, with the city of Reno, really looking broadly across the entire city with improving the flashers.

So there's always opportunities to work closer together.

We are absolutely always thinking about this, but this is an area of where the city or the county can work with the school district when we look at routes.

We have safe routes to schools, but there does exist a sphere of where the school district operates, and then as we think about ourselves as cities and counties and where all of our communities are walking along those walkways as well.

Councilmember Rodriguez knows that full well as well.

But yeah, thank you for that point of Reminder.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

First of all, thank you to you and the vice chair for scheduling this item.

It was something that I uh believe I requested a couple of months back because I think that there are things from a regional perspective that we all contribute to, and in this forum, that is the opportunity to do it.

Um, I want to say to Mr.

Searcy, thank you for your leadership.

Um, this is um a team effort.

I know there's no I and team, but you have been exceptional to work with.

I have the privilege um, along with council member Martinez of serving on the Capital Funds Protection Committee and the Oversight Committee and Miss Andrea.

I was just diming out my colleagues at the city of Reno.

Exactly.

I'll give you my rose freely.

Um, but I I will tell you, I've had the opportunity to serve now for I think eight years.

Um it's an incredibly important body and perhaps not as well known and and perhaps overlooked.

Um, I know all of us on the body here are familiar with it, but there have been really important and critical discussions that have happened there, uh, things that have been able to made the process better as they moved up into the school district.

The the leadership of the school district um has been wise to invest so much um uh I think I don't know if it's um uh uh uh discretion or leadership in you because you have really taken uh this community from where it was to where it is today and where it's going.

So uh a lot of kudos uh belongs to you and your staff.

Um and I want to just say there are many things about this plan that are still works in progress as you develop um the opportunity to go out to communities and ask them and invite them into the conversations about it.

Uh, continue to do that because I think when we lean into it, the legacy of WC One will be forever profoundly changing for this region and its children, and I think we will be reaping the benefits of the WC One um opportunity for you know, literally generations.

So thank you for that.

Thank you.

Commissioner Rodriguez.

Uh thank you, man.

Uh good to see you again, Mrs.

Hearson.

It's always a pleasure.

Uh, just real quick, can you uh give an update as far because I still know when I left the school district, uh, there's still some schools that were didn't have the single point entry.

Can you kind of just give a quick snapshot?

Like where are we at on those as far as I know that was a goal when I left that we wanted all our schools to have that level of security.

Can you tell us where we're at?

Yeah, I thank you for the question.

You know, our gloss is pretty high-level overview of these major projects, new schools, but a component of the WC One also is made possible.

So what we call our capital renewal program.

So we're you know, catching up on our pent-up maintenance backlogs, roofing, pavement repairs, HVAC repairs, and safety upgrades.

So C C T V cameras, secure perimeters, and single points of entry.

Of course, installing all of those elements uh standard in our newest schools, but retrofitting our existing schools has been a long time progress and an issue that you help champion and motivate us to complete at the high school level.

So specifically the update, elementary schools and middle schools across the district all have essentially a secure perimeter fencing and a secure single point of entry at all of our schools.

Our high schools are most dynamic and largest campuses, have been a difficult challenge for us for years.

But again, through your leadership and advocacy, we've forged ahead with several um initial projects to learn how best to do that on our high school campuses.

And I can announce and uh with with the approvals of the board, we are under construction with retrofits to all the remaining high school campuses.

Uh they'll be done either before the start of next school year or uh by the end of this calendar year.

We'll have some form of secure perimeter and single point of entry at all of our schools in the district.

Awesome.

Think it's good to hear.

Yeah.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Anyone else have any questions or comments?

I do.

Yes, Commissioner Clark.

Thank you, uh, Madam Chair.

Uh I wasn't gonna bring this up, but uh since others opened the door, I think I'll I will talk about it.

I was meeting with the uh homeowners association yesterday at Arrow Creek, and uh the the whole purpose of the meeting was school safety up by uh Marcy Hurt School.

Uh parents are parking along Arrow Creek, illegally parking.

I'll show you some pictures after uh and take a look at it.

And we maybe need to share that with the staff.

The folks are parking along Arrow Creek.

The homeowners are worried they're gonna crash into the parents illegally parked on Arrow Creek, and the parents are parking there and then launching their children over land uh through the wild to get to school to avoid the cues in the parking lot.

So that's something that needs to be addressed.

Maybe some no parking signs, maybe a red curb along Arrow Creek.

But uh again, I told the uh folks at the Arrow Creek uh homeowners association I would bring it up.

And I didn't realize we were gonna be talking about that here today, school safety, but uh uh uh it's an excellent opportunity to get that on the record.

So thank you.

If you'll uh talk to me afterwards, we can I'll show you the pictures and we can talk about maybe how we can fix that.

Thank you.

Of course, you know, it's just it's all about partnership.

Infrastructure can always be improved, but you know, uh public right-of-way policing and enforcement coupled with education and engagement through our parent community service schools, always working to help uh manage the behavior of our school communities.

Go ahead, Commissioner Rodriguez.

Uh thank you, ma'am.

Uh I will say uh uh to Commissioner Clark.

Um I'm not sure my uh believe a real creek is that within the city of Reno or it is okay.

Because I do know that uh um one of the things that I I enjoyed seeing as I've developed in this realm uh was our partnership with the City of Sparks School Police.

Uh we've actually got an MOU with school police um where they actually help uh patrol and address some of those needs.

Uh specifically read is one of them uh that I know of that the school police will actually go across the street and kind of help patrol areas outside what be normally their uh patrol area.

Uh so that might be possible uh solution.

And I also know with Bohatch, um, our traffic units have been out there quite a bit um with the speeding and stuff like that and the illegal parking.

So that could maybe potentially be an avenue with the sheriff's office or city range.

Thank you for bringing that up.

That was the first question I asked yesterday is whose road is Arrow Creek.

You know, uh it could be uh uh end dot, it could be city areno, it could be the county, it's a county road.

But the uh when we looked at the property lines where the folks are parking is on school property.

So uh that's um something that I think it could be easily addressed to through the uh teachers and the administrators there at the school, but also uh maybe some red paint on the curb and some no parking signs at this particular area, I think would uh fix the problem.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anything else before I close this agenda item?

Okay, thank you, Mr.

Searcy.

It was very informative.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Next, we're gonna move along to 7B presentation discussion and possible adoption of the TMRPA budget for fiscal year 2026 through 2027.

Dr.

Smith.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Jeremy Smith for the record.

Thanks for this opportunity to present our proposed budget for the next fiscal year.

26-27.

Uh, next slide, please.

Okay, so per the request of this board, we start our budget conversations for the agencies or for the agency in October.

Thank you.

And uh follow up again in December, and then bring either in February or April our budget for adoption.

This October, we had a pretty busy meeting.

And so we kind of kicked it, but we did talk about things in December.

Since then, I have had one-on-one discussions with both city managers and the county manager.

All three have agreed to a two percent increase to our jurisdiction annual allocations for our budget, and those are the numbers that I've got up there.

That results in an addition of 21,700.

So it's a it's a pretty small increase, but having that year over year, uh addressing of uh inflation and little little increases to our budget really helps us create this sustainable budget that you've all asked me to do.

And we're in a really good spot right now.

So uh it's working.

So before we go to the next budget, there's a lot of numbers here.

It's uh it's okay if you can't read them all.

But this is our estimate to complete.

We always bring this forward.

You know, we can look, we're now in February.

This is inclusive of the first six months of our existing fiscal year.

We look at what we said we were gonna spend and what actually happens, right?

And we we look at that six month mark to understand where do we think we'll be at the end of the year.

And we look really good.

Looks like we're gonna be just around 1,200 uh over budget.

So dipping into our fund balance.

I had actually tried to dip further into our fund balance to kind of keep that at the right level because you know, we're doing good.

But we received some monies we didn't expect in the form of a donation from the Greg Nelson Warren Nelson Family Trust, thanks to a connection uh from Councilmember Dewar to Frankie Zudel Papa, who administers that trust, and they have actually given us that donation to fund the regional trails coordinator position that I had you guys uh vote on and enable for us to take over once the Parks Foundation went dark.

So, you know, we're always reacting to what actually happens.

But uh point being we're in a really good spot, and you'll see that we are gonna we're planning to dip into that fund balance moving forward uh to make sure that uh we keep that at the right level commensurate to our overall budget.

Some assumptions on how we're gonna finish out this year.

We I've been talking about hiring a GIS technician for uh two years now.

And given where we're at with the position and the fact that Joan Aheadland, who had been an intern through the PAC internship process at TMRPA, then was working for Jay Howard at the Parks Foundation during trails in AmeriCorps.

We scooped him up as soon as uh we needed him there to help us get that trails data in action, and we've put him on as the GIS technician now.

So he's working more hours.

In addition, we have Eli Mosner who's joined us from UNR uh as an intern and another intern as well, Darren Roach.

So we're doing what I'm calling the GIS surge.

And so this is all goes together with the fact that you know, we lost Damien at the end of 2024, and we had a bit of a gap in terms of our GIS capacity in the agency.

Combine that with the fact that ESRI has changed their, you know, their technology model.

We're a little behind, but that's not uncommon for organizations and government entities that invest so much time with GIS, build a bunch of systems, and then it really is a process then to convert to the next level.

Well, now we have Tyler Smith, has been on for eight months now, I think.

And uh he's an expert in the implementation of these new technologies.

And so we are making a lot of progress, and we anticipate uh addressing any backlog we have with development tracking.

We have a bit of a backlog, that's true, but we're on it right now, and we're just gonna throw all of our resources towards this GIS stuff, you know, to get us back to I think where where we've been in the past with with our capacity around GIS, and that helps us, you know, serve the jurisdictions, do our role in terms of dwelling unit tracking, uh, be more real-time in terms of being able to forecast the future and where development's gonna occur and the like, and then bring to this body that third foundational document and plan and element of the regional plan.

We have natural resources, we got that.

We've got our public infrastructure plan, both living documents that we're continuously trying to improve.

Now the third one is gonna be the GIS spatial modeling housing and population projection document that I've talked about before.

So excited to uh really put a lot of emphasis into that area of our business.

And I talked about the regional trails coordinator position.

We actually got several good candidates applying for that.

Uh, we've we have a little selection committee made up of uh parks planning staff from Washa County, uh, a member from the biggest little trails stewardship from the TMT working group, and we're gonna do a couple interviews next week, and we anticipate we'll have someone starting on that uh hopefully March 1st, if if they can start that quickly.

So that's in process.

And uh we are in the process, as you saw, hopefully in the staff report that we are beginning to put together the tracking and information around our agency report card, how we're meeting those strategic work goals that we came up with at the beginning of this current fiscal year.

And, you know, based on what I've done so far on that front, we're looking really good.

Uh we are making quite a bit of progress, kind of following the plan.

So looking forward to bringing that report card forward in in a subsequent meeting.

So that's to finish the year, which leads us then to next year.

And uh, we talked about the 2%, uh, continuing the shared work programs with the Regional Transportation Commission and Western Regional Water Commission.

Those have been really uh fantastic to be a part of, and I think very successful.

Uh up to a 5% merit increase for staff.

We're gonna continue the GIS surge.

So we get, I think, to echo uh councilwoman Anderson's comments, not just what we owe, but what we can imagine in terms of GIS and how we can move forward.

I thought that was great.

So that's exactly what we're thinking about in terms of the GIS.

There's always costs, right?

That tend to seem to go up.

PERSENSA go up, cost for services go up.

So that's also something that we're assuming in our budget.

And so then here is the proposed budget.

Hard to read, but also in the handout I gave you.

But looks like, you know, given the surge, given what we're doing with trails, uh, we're looking to dig into that fund balance by about 130,000.

And that's really if we max max our time and really get there.

So that's good because I think it brings that balance back to a more appropriate level.

And you know, we it allows us to continue to move forward, have the GIS technician have the interns, and and everybody continue to keep moving uh in their salary ranges as well.

And then, of course, we every time we do this now, we do a five-year outlook too, because obviously we don't know what is exactly going to happen in five years, but we can try to get ahead of it, and we can use this five-year outlook to kind of gauge how are we doing in terms of predicting.

And again, a lot of numbers, tough to see.

But point is is that at year five, which is fiscal year 3031, according to this scheme with a few assumptions on continued allocation increases, we could still maintain uh about a 10% fund balance, which I think is a really good target to be in the 10, 15, even 20 percent range is where we're trying to kind of keep that.

So it's one scenario.

We're always focused on the actual year, but every year we do look ahead five years to see to make sure that uh, you know, we're we're keeping it sustainable.

So, with that, I'm happy to answer any questions about the budget you might have, or there's a motion on the screen uh to adopt the budget as presented.

Thank you.

Thank you, Dr.

Smith.

Yes, Commissioner Rock Rings.

Thank you.

Full of questions today.

So uh I think as one with the freshman here.

I just have a quick question.

Uh, just for my knowledge and maybe for as Mayor Lawson likes to say a million viewers on YouTube watching this live.

Yes.

Uh for the revenue portion between the city of Reno, City Sparks, Swashaw County.

Uh, I guess like the contributions, how if we could go back to that slide?

Of course.

Yeah, you no problem.

Um see the city of Reno pays over 400,000 sparks in Washington County pay three.

I guess like how did that come about?

Like uh it is uh it's a function of state law, and the funding for this agency is defined by the membership on this board.

And so there are four members from Reno on the board, and that is owing to the fact that Reno has 52% of the region's population.

So Reno pays a little more.

Okay.

Thank you.

Very welcome.

Any other questions?

Okay, if there are none, I will entertain a motion.

Okay, five seconds.

And I have a second.

Any further discussion?

Okay, seeing none, please vote.

All right.

Great.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

I'm gonna move along to 7C update and possible direction to staff regarding the regional.

Oh, sorry, update on TMRPA energy sector policy review and data center research.

Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you very much.

Uh, we're gonna tag team this presentation.

We're gonna hear from Chris Tali.

We're gonna hear from Shali Sousa, and then I'll wrap us up the end to giving this update on our efforts in the energy sector.

Chris, take it away.

Good afternoon, governing board members.

Chris Tolly.

Uh team RPA uh prefaced by Director Smith will be giving an update on the uh TMRPA energy policy review and data center research.

Okay, starting with a little bit of background, and as most of you'll remember during the 2024 Turkey Meadows Regional Plan update, we really focused on the public infrastructure plan and the natural resources plan and our work associated with both of those, which included a large amount of data collection, uh helped us to understand that we needed to, even though this was in the back of our mind, uh that we needed to look at the energy related policies and the regional plan.

And then additionally, through the the TMRPA data center research, which that effort was requested by the RPC.

Um, that really further clarified our need to look at the energy policies again uh that are in the regional plan.

And I'll be talking about the the energy policy portion and then pass it off to Cho to talk again about the the data center research, and then Jeremy will finish up.

Okay, team RPA's role and the energy sector.

So this was essentially defined by the Nevada revised statutes and the 89 to 91 time frame.

And a couple of them are listed in the NRS, the Nevada revised statutes, and also the RPC's resolution that implements that particular portion of the statutes.

There are a laundry list of things that were that are related to the energy, our role in the energy sector, and those it's electric substation, transmission line that generates 60 kilovolts more and a facility that generates electric electricity greater than five megamegawatts.

And these are all listed as projects of regional significance and require review or require a conformance review process, but they also the first two substation and transmission lines that exceed 60 kilovolts are required to be represented in the regional plan on the map that we can see.

And I think that's map three.

So you see the corridors and utility sites listed in the regional plan, and we come forward a few times a year to amend the regional plan to represent the new ones we get.

And there is a limit to our regulatory rule, and that is that any entity that is regulated by the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada or PUCN is exempt from our processes.

So for example, NV Energy NV Energy does not provide its facilities plan for us to review for conformance with the regional plan.

And then the final point for this slide is the region plan policies, again related to the energy sector, are on the right, and we will be looking at those not necessarily in depth through this presentation, but as we go through this item over the next couple few months.

So the energy related policy review.

And this is all again, it's predicated on the NRS listing these items.

And there was an effort that concluded essentially in 2009, and that was the regional utility corridor report.

And that essentially had the corridors and sites listed in the regional plan, as well as how what we had arrived at in terms of policies through the work with the community and the local jurisdictions.

But beyond that, beyond updating or looking at those policies, we're also looking at additional subjects that warrant consideration through this process, and that would be something such as a battery energy storage system, high energy businesses like a data center or an industrial type use, solar installation, location information and attributes.

That's not something that is required to be tracked in the regional plan, but we think it is useful, and we've done that essentially through the data center research to understand where these are and what the salient points for each of those facilities is, as well as understanding at a greater level of detail the state goals for renewable energy generation and energy storage, as that we could likely understand as stuff that we would see in the future in terms of an emphasis on renewables or energy storage.

And then finally looking at the regional plan utility corridors and sites information to increase the attribution.

And one of the the clear things that we were thinking is identifying the easement with the actual easement, recorded easement for the corridors and representing that as part of our data.

But there are additional data pieces that we may identify as being important to also reflect, and that would be for members of the public, for staff of the jurisdictions and entities, and then also appointed and elected officials.

All right.

And then data analysis and research, which is what what we do really for all of our major efforts, including the public infrastructure plan, the natural resources plan.

So getting that data, bring it in and understand what it means.

And then finally, to facilitate the process, we are in discussion with the right brain, left brain communications regarding an engagement plan for this effort.

Okay, expected outcomes.

So we can see it on the left hand side of the slide.

We've got the regional utility corridor report, and that was essentially updated for the final time in 2009, and that information was rolled into the regional plan.

And what we see is in terms of a path forward for this is to really rolling that into the public infrastructure plan.

And Jeremy brought up a good point when we were making this.

And if it's the state law tells us to do something, we're going to document it, and we think it's appropriate to put this in the public infrastructure plan given the connection between energy infrastructure and public infrastructure.

And then we're also again planning to look at potential updates to the regional plan.

That would include policies that would include definitions of things such as a battery energy storage system, and then increasing the attribution of our data, such as easement widths or other things we identify as important through this process, reviewing the existing data for accuracy.

We have utility sites out there that are not necessarily matched up with an actual on-the-ground site.

So it's trueing those up to make sure they're accurate.

And then the time frames overall for this, we're seeing really for the first two items on the slide the policy updates and the new PIP chapter or section, that those items will be completed through the balance of this calendar year and looking at the data work that will essentially start at the same time, but possibly take longer and extend into the 2027 timeframe.

So with that, I will pass it off to Cho for the next part.

All right.

Hi everyone, I'm gonna print that from over here.

It's a little easier.

Shawnee Sousa, TMRPA for the record.

Um, I'm gonna show you our dedicated webpage on this front.

And as Chris said, where this really started was from the RPC requesting that we do more research into data centers and our role in the energy sector.

So through that, we've done you know a lot of reports, a lot of presentations, and so this website really takes all of that and gives you a one-stop shop of information.

And you know, right now we think it's in a really good spot.

We've really gone through each of our facts, each you know, piece of information, all of our discussions, and made a really good synthesis of it.

But this is gonna be a living web page.

So as we learn more, we'll keep adding.

So I'm gonna just briefly take you through and show you the different portions as well as get into some of our main highlights for each of the sections.

So this first part here is our team RPA research areas, and we came up with four, and this is for data centers and high energy users.

They're energy, water, water use, um, land use, and economic considerations.

And each of these sections starts with a little intro here to get yourself grounded.

And we also have this dropdown.

And this drop down for each of them is a little different, and it shows, you know, like I said, through discussion, through research, each of those points that we found to be really important to tell this story, you know, both locally, and there's a couple of points of you know what's happening in other regions.

So be sure to check this out when you get a chance.

And I'll just take you through some of our main points here.

So for energy, according to the IRP, we could see energy demand increase greatly in the future from high energy users like data centers.

So we're really planning for it.

However, a lot of it is really happening in other counties, like Story County, not as much here yet.

Since the last three data center requests that were heard locally this last year, January 2025, um, we really haven't heard of any more.

And I will scroll down just a little bit to show you this table.

So this shows you um renewable energy project projects reviewed and approved as projects of regional significance or PRSs by the regional planning commission since 2015.

So you can see we have a number of renewable uh types.

We have our solar and geothermal, and it shows the power generation and the estimated facility coverage.

And this is more of our lane and our job over at TMRPA.

You know, we're looking at land use and we oversee these requests.

So, next, moving on to water use.

Again, you have that intro here and some good points and some highlights from here is that so far it doesn't appear that data centers locating in our area will be big water users.

Those locating here know the high cost and availability concerns around using this as a method for cooling.

However, that's why energy use and costs are higher, and it's because instead of using water to cool, they're using energy to cool.

So that's one important part is just understanding what's going on there.

And the next part we'll draw from this is for data centers and other high water users.

We're currently engaged with Temwa and others to ensure that we have appropriate policies for high water using businesses, and we'll continue to work further with them as we go on as needed.

One example of this is an existing policy is the Project of Regional Significance Review Threshold, which is 625 acre feet per year, and that applies to approval requests for large water users, including data centers.

And one more notable point here is that for our region, the use of treated effluent in these cases from our region's wastewater facilities.

Currently, the Tri-Center uses about 400 acre feet of treated effluent for cooling needs.

And this agreement allowed, and there's an agreement with the Tri-Center that allows for 4,000 acre feet of treated effluent to be delivered if available.

Again, we have some more tables in here.

Not gonna go through that right now.

All right, so land use.

So this is more of our lane.

This is where team RPA really lives.

And for this one, we know that high energy users and data centers are not fit for residential uses due to potential noise, lighting, and 24 hour operations.

And for those larger uh data centers or energy users, that really should be in more of an industrial land use.

But for smaller, you can maybe see that in some commercial.

We also know that employment is very low for these large land uses.

However, once constructed, the traffic is very low.

So in this section, we have a lot of various trade-offs.

Once again, please continue to check that out.

And finally, we have economic considerations.

So for this one, developers consistently cite tax abatement as a factor in the decision to locate in northern Nevada.

Goed offers 10 to 20 year abatements on personal property tax and sales and use tax for qualifying data centers.

11 data centers have qualified for abatements since 2016 across Nevada, and seven of those have been in northern Nevada.

And an average of 2.51 dollars is received per dollar when abated in our region.

And also notable for the economy topic area, state law allows for local jurisdictions to collect franchise fees of up to 5% of NV energy's rate-based revenues for operating within their boundaries, which are deposited into local governments' general funds.

So that's just some of our main highlights from that.

I know there's a mouthful, but please continue to check it out.

There's a lot of good information there.

Next, we'll move on to the section of organizations related to data centers.

So, really, like I said, this is supposed to be a one-stop shop of information, but because there are so many players, there's so many concerns, so many different layers to this, it's really important to know who to talk to when you have a certain concern or when you want to learn more.

Who do you call?

So at this at the top right, you can see once again our four topic areas energy demand, water use, land use, economic considerations.

And as you scroll down, we have descriptions of each organization and kind of what they do in this realm.

And we start from national, state, regional, and local.

And so, as I said, it'll show local.

Okay, local.

And so, as I said, this is really to point people on who do they talk to when they have a concern or a worry.

So, an example of this is for those that are worried about their rates going up.

They would see here that you want to talk to the Nevada Bureau of Consumer Protection.

And another example is you know, if you're looking at land use, once again, we have the icon there.

And for team RPA, as you guys know, in this regard, our role is to review uh land use projects and map those requests.

So it's important to know obviously who to talk to, and this is in an aid to direct people.

And it also has you know links to each of their websites as well.

So moving on throughout the research process, we found a lot of really important, you know, uh research articles and different organizations that we used.

So we have the PUCN regulation fact seat fact sheet, go ed tax abatements, the urban land institute papers, so various articles here, and it continues on down this way, and a lot of those you know we received in discussion through working with this.

So if you ever have more, you know, we're happy to add to it as well.

And then the last section here is our past reports and presentations.

So here you can find you know the date of each of the times we've presented on this, and honestly, you'll see that our research has grown over time and it's you know corrected itself, and maybe we got numbers more right as we went.

So we have presentations and reports, and you can see each of those here.

And finally, we have our materials and survey results from our community conversation.

So if you follow this here, we had that community conversation in August of 2025, and we had a small survey that we conducted there, and then we attempted to continue it in person.

We're gonna have more surveys, as Chris said to continue this work, but what we really learned from this, you know, there's ton here, but what we wanted to point out is the five things that are most important to the public that we learned about were water use restrictions and reporting, environmental considerations, safeguards for existing ratepayers, community benefits and reporting, and fostering the use of renewable energy.

So lots here once again for the survey results.

Be sure to come and check it out.

And I'll pass it over to Jeremy to wrap it up.

Thank you, Chris and Shawnee.

Uh, you guys can just forward the slides for me.

So you can see that we've been hard at work trying to uh get on top of things, especially based on the direction from this body and from the RPC to get our hands around high energy users, but also to understand what our role is.

And given that our policies have remained largely unchanged since 2009 in relation to how we go about vetting these things that are PRS, you know, five megawatt generation or greater transmission lines.

We think it it's a very good time to uh, as we've talked about before, you know, double down on that and make sure we're we're keeping up with new technologies and and new trends.

And so that's what we're we're really hoping to focus on.

I had the the great opportunity to participate in the Nevada Water Resources Association conference last week down in Las Vegas.

I was invited by Tumwell staff to come participate in that.

And so I did, and uh I mean it it's still obviously a very buzz-oriented topic.

Folks are really interested.

We had high attendance at our panel.

It was a great panel.

I learned a ton.

We were I was joined by uh researcher from the Desert Research Institute, from uh staff from Nevada Energy, from leadership at the uh Story County, the Tri-Center GID from uh Southern Nevada Water, and also from the data center Switch that's out in Story County.

And in fact, uh Elise from Switch offered a tour.

So if folks are interested and haven't got a chance to get out there and see what's going on, uh hopefully I could arrange that.

So I'll follow up with an email, I'll let you know.

But just it it was a great it was a great forum to discuss, especially obviously around water use.

Um a little bit of myth busting around water use.

Water certainly can be a component of a high energy use, primarily for cooling, uh often through evaporative cooling, but also used to charge the closed loop cooling systems uh that actually cool the the processors right there on the rack mounted servers.

And as we know, as as Shawne mentioned, in our region, water is a limited resource.

And so the direction here and in conversations with folks is that using water for cooling is not really the approach that is is being put forward.

But that that does come with uh, you know, a price tag on energy, because if you don't have that water, you know, in a water rich environment, you could save energy costs by using water for cooling.

But since we're not in that environment, we need to, you know, increase the air conditioning.

Now it used to be they would just air condition the entire server building, right?

The entire data center.

But now it's more like the servers are living inside of a refrigerator and they're controlling where they apply the power.

So the technology and the efficiencies continue to increase.

And, you know, we we got, as I sometimes do, some comments from the groups there that well, you've painted a really rosy picture, you got it all taken care of.

And I don't think that that's true, but I will say that as a group of folks and people and as a region here, we are on top of it, and we are keeping our eye on the ball.

Uh and it does change fast.

So I think we need to continue uh to do that.

But I really think that uh the focus for us needs to be on the stuff that Chris was talking about and what our actual regulatory lane is and how we can do the best job possible of administering uh those policies for our views.

One more slide for me, please.

So, what's coming up next?

Really, it's this idea of a regionally coordinated response.

I had one-on-one conversations with staff at the local jurisdictions with the county and city managers regarding this.

At this time, and we're gonna see this when we get to the schools item.

There from our perspective as team RPA staff, there is not a goal that we're putting forward to create some sort of regional rule like a PRS guideline.

However, I think it's really important that we work together regionally, uh, that we're all on the same page, then we're all aligned and rowing in the same direction.

And so that is the kind of effort that we're trying to foster through communication with our local partners and affected entities.

And so, to my understanding, everyone agrees and is on board with that.

So that's that's the path that we're trying to move forward on.

And I think also we need to engage with uh Story County, especially, but other other counties in Nevada where this is really happening in a huge way.

It's not we've had a few data center requests, and we have some long-standing small data centers, but the very big ones and the big energy demand, I think is really coming from our neighbors.

So making sure that they're part of the conversation.

And then we of course always want to re-engage the community and make sure that we're getting out of the public, getting the feedback and bringing that to bear.

But again, I'll just with that last bullet there.

I I think that uh we want to help.

We're available to talk about what we've found so far.

We've showed you the website.

We're gonna dig in.

There's one more section of the website that you can expect to see from us in the next couple weeks, and that's gonna be specifically around, you know, well-cited reference to ordinances, guidelines, legislation, whatever that has been enacted in other regions.

We want to just make that resource very available on the site.

So in service of this regionally coordinated response.

So with that, um questions?

Yeah, happy to accept the motion to accept the report or just thank you.

Vice Chair Kaylar.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for the information, lots of good information.

I guess I'm not really sure what the next step is.

It seems like we're in the information gathering phase.

We have a lot of information, it's on the website now, great resources.

Is there a um a willingness to want to bring this to jurisdictions for adoption where we start looking at standards of okay?

We have this many employees, this much water use, this much energy need energy needs you go to permit, or you have to go to the entitlement process.

I guess I'm wondering where do we talk about standards as far as adoption applying them as applications come forward in our jurisdictions?

Are we there yet?

Is that something we're gonna look at?

It's excellent question.

I I don't feel like we're there yet, but that's the piece that I'm gonna be adding to the site.

And I think in service of that regionally coordinated response, we're having discussions at the staff level and with leadership.

I think what we've learned through many years, right with the schools piece, but also with with this project that you know, we we need to stay in our lane.

And I think with you know, some maybe specific exceptions for PRS.

This is it, it is a local kind of rule setting operation.

Okay.

And so we want to try to help empower the local jurisdictions to achieve that with great information and make sure that everyone is uh like I say aligned.

And and that those are conversations I've been having, and potentially will you might see me show up at your local jurisdiction body to give uh a version, a presentation version of this, especially once we have that ordinance information.

But uh, yeah, we want to enable those discussions so that they can bring it to you.

And then my next question was on the last bullet that you pointed out.

Can you what is upgrading our approach mean?

Uh specifically, it's focus on upgrading uh TMRPA's approach.

Yeah, I think we'll have a role in the energy.

Yes, we as Chris mentioned, we have a series of eight or nine policies right now that control uh exactly what we do when those PRS uh for energy uh thresholds are are met.

So if somebody creates a substation out there in somewhere in Washoe County or a new solar facility that generates, we create a point uh that says regional utility site, and and then that's it.

And we're just kind of we've just sort of uh, yeah, so I want to upgrade that, I guess, uh to what how many megawatts and who's the owner and you know, get get the attributes and start making it a more useful.

We inherited this to some degree, and I think, like I say, it was part of that 2009 effort.

We just want to get it to our level, our standard level, and have as much info as possible.

Thank you so much.

You're welcome.

Commissioner Durr.

Yeah, um, thank you so much.

Great great update.

I'm glad to hear progress is being made.

Um kudos on being able to co-present with Tomwa on this issue.

Um, I agree.

I don't think our big emphasis here in Nevada, as water short as we are, I think everybody understands that.

I don't think that's that we're in danger of becoming the Virginia story.

But I think the Virginia story is instructive, which is they did have a lot of water, so they didn't anticipate the problem, and so then they do have a problem.

And so what I want to make sure is that we are being proactive, whatever any jurisdiction wants to do, so that we can preemptorily knowing what we know from other parts of the country, we can get out in front of this instead of doing a typical Nevada approach, unfortunately, and that is being behind the eight ball, you know, um, where we're playing catch up.

And I would just like to learn from them.

So I'm looking forward to this addition to the website.

Um, I wasn't sure when you said stay in our lane.

I guess you meant your agency, which is information, data, and advice, but it sounds like not so much focused on advice to what we should do in each jurisdiction, is what you're saying.

Is that what you're saying?

Uh yes, thank you for that question.

I think we want to help guide the conversation based on our understanding of what's been successful elsewhere.

But uh, yeah, we're not looking to say thou shalt.

Yeah.

Well, you never do.

I mean, you never have.

Right.

But I appreciate your your effort to create the information and this database that we can all share.

And so we all have a common platform of information.

What we do with it and how we see the demands might be a little different amongst the jurisdictions.

And I 100% agree that I I do see our biggest challenge in dealing with the electricity uh new generation of electricity and the fear that many residents have that those costs will be exported onto them and won't be fully um burdened by the the developer of the thing.

And that goes right to the point of planning, I think, which is to ensure that we that whoever's developing whatever is mitigating the impacts of their development on their neighbors, on their region, and so on.

And I I think that is really what the heart of planning is about, which is you know, you're you're not an island when you're doing any kind of development, whether it be a school like we're talking about, or a commercial activity, residents, whatever, but that you have to look at the how the impacts flow, whether it's traffic impacts or whatever.

So I just want to make sure that we keep centered, um, even at our own jurisdictions on what's important and what relate to data centers.

And it sounds like to me, that is the energy story and how we make sure the burden is shared by those creating the challenges or creating a burden.

So thank you.

Commissioner Rodriguez.

Uh thank you, madam chair.

Uh I apologize if I missed it.

I was kind of looking, um, but uh to your point with like uh the gathering of stall information.

Um before I ask the question, I want I do want to thank you and staff for this presentation and all the information you've gathered.

Um is maybe it's on the website that uh that's provided, but um what are like some of the possible barriers or hazards when we decommission or not we, but if a business decommissions uh a data center, because I mean right now it's the hottest greatest thing, literally.

But uh there's a lot of like hazardous materials that go to create these um buildings.

So it's kind of is there any information into that if a business was to leave, like what potential hazards or the risk is.

It's a great question.

Um couple answers there.

I I've from my research, I've learned that the server hardware, the the guts of these things changes on the order of every three to five years, they're replacing it.

I don't have information on the sort of waste stream aspect of that, but we can look into that.

I'm sure there is a kind of agreed upon a method for doing that.

I think what has come up at as a point of uh apprehension is what if we make agreements with high energy users and then they don't come through.

And we've somehow, you know, are we gonna be on the hook for infrastructure that's been installed?

And so there is uh through the PUCN, something called Rule Nine, which makes it public that there has to be a public uh agreement in terms of transmission and substation location between a business and NV Energy.

So that's vetted through the PUCN process, and part of that is to ensure that there's safeguards in there so that we're not left holding the bag if if the entity, the organization doesn't, you know, if they go bankrupt or whatever.

But there is no uh public requirement for the generation sites.

And so that's something that NV Energy still enters into agreements, and but they're really managing that aspect of protecting us from the orphaned infrastructure in that sense, uh, because it it's not a rule nine thing.

In conversations with the PC, they indicated they were trying to work to get that into the rule nine scenario.

But uh, I think that is kind of the that's something we need to be watching for is that ensuring that these agreements have those those safeguards in place so that we don't end up holding the bag if the businesses don't don't make it.

Yeah, no, and and uh you know, I would challenge my colleagues to like see there's a list of hazardous materials that go into creating these, and if you know, heavens forbid that you know you put one up next to wherever, you know, whatever our witnesses are, and they move on or whatnot.

You know, there's a building there with a great number of hazardous materials in there adjacent within our community.

So I would really like to, along with all the information you have gathered for us for the different jurisdictions, I would really would like to know what decommissioning or uh if I could abandonment uh sure would look like.

You got it.

Thank you.

Okay.

Commissioner Reese.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um, so first of all, a couple of things, and I actually have uh quite a few things I'd like to talk about.

Um first, Mr.

Tully and Miss Sousa uh outstanding presentation.

Thank you for the work that you put in.

I also understand from people in the community that the found or that the meetings that we've held, I think there was one on February 5th, were incredibly well received and very thorough, uh, that we presented ourselves well.

Um what I am concerned about is that there are no stakeholders here today that are of concern to me, meaning somehow our uh identified item on the agenda did not rise to the level of which anyone noticed it, and then they came in and they're quite uh, you know, vocal.

They're there they come to our meetings quite often.

So it worries me that we did not do a very good job of explaining what this agenda item was.

Um I didn't fully understand it, and then part of the presentation is not included in our packet, right?

The the walkthrough of the website, uh, which is uh also quite excellent.

Um, but again, that that that we don't have a room full of concerned citizens who are thinking about it, and the Sierra Club uh worries me that they didn't know it was here, and therefore we're not gonna be able to hear their comments today.

Um second is there's like a buried lead here, and I heard it in Miss Suza's presentation, which I think bears repeating and for which we uh I think have uh uh obligation to tell people, which is the statement by you, Miss Susa, that says it does not appear that large-scale data centers will or can locate here, right?

And I heard it in Miss Suza's presentation, which I think bears repeating and for which we I think have a obligation to tell people, which is the statement by you, Miss Souza, that says it does not appear that large-scale data centers will or can locate here, right?

That they will or can locate in Reno Sparks Washoe County.

I do think that there's a large issue of Story County and other counties, but there are significant limitations on our power grid.

There is not really the developable land, which to me has been a reason why, at least at my home jurisdiction, we have been very reluctant to just jump headlong into this debate, and for which there was a reason why I at this body asked that it be something we took up and that we have subsequently taken up as a group, in part because I have maintained and continue to maintain that these are issues of regional importance.

And rather that the county went one route, Reno went another.

I I think I was following, but I'm not sure what Sparks has done.

Is there a moratorium isn't there?

Is are there standards coming, aren't there?

And this presentation suggests to me that we all have to be rowing in the same direction.

And why I think it is maybe a disagreement that I may have with colleagues here about the role of this body, right?

I heard another point that may relate to this that was in Miss Suze's presentation, that it was the um it was the trigger for water usage or consumptive usage, which would trigger a project of regional significance.

And it went so fast, and I was trying to take some good notes that I'll have to follow up on it later.

But again, in my mind, what happened when you said that was the light went off and it said this is why this issue belongs here.

If there are things that are consumptive water users in a way that is so large that we ought to be regulating it and not worrying that Reno would do one thing, sparks another, the county another, that it should be here at this body.

So whether or not we need to do a deeper dive into what all those triggers are, um, but again, it's it's juxtapose against the comment that you made earlier, Miss Sousa, that it says it does not appear large-scale data centers will or can locate here.

Um, I don't want us to chase problems.

I want us to find solutions for the problems that we find ourselves in.

It's not a matter of being proactive or defensive.

We know that data centers are a large national buzzworthy topic.

You've indicated um, Dr.

Smith, that you went to this conference, switch was there, all those things.

I don't think switch is coming to Reno Sparks Washoe County, right?

And so I don't want us to be the ones who are um trying to create um solutions to problems we don't have.

And I want us to be forward thinking about it.

I also think it answers the community's concern who are rightfully coming in front of our bodies and saying, we think that this is something that you should get a handle on, yet we know that they're not coming here, right?

We did have three that all came in very close succession to the city of Reno.

They were small, but I characterize personally as boutique data centers, not high users of water or energy.

We're trying to work through those things, all of which were approved by the city of Reno, in part because we looked at them individually, project by project, and recognize that they were not high users of those things.

Um but I'm not sure that that will answer the concerns of all of the folks in our community, many of which came out in large numbers to say their piece about data centers.

Um, and so I am kind of stuck here.

A, I think we've kind of buried the lead, right?

I think that there are not enough people here.

We don't have media here.

I don't know if people understood what would be talked about here, but it does not seem like this is something that we have to um go out and and worry about as we have a lot of things we're worried about at local government.

Um I want us to do it if it's appropriate.

I want us to understand what our lane is.

I do think what we do, we should be doing together, um, meaning Sparks, the county and Reno should be having the same kinds of standards, so that a data center does not sort of pit one of us against the other or move across one city's jurisdictional boundaries or in or in an incorporated Washoe County in order to avoid some good regulatory structures.

Um again, I it may be that this item has got to come back in a different way, be a standalone item where it's talking just about what our role could be.

And and ultimately, I suppose you said uh Dr.

Smith, that our role is a very specific thing, it's a creature of statute.

Um I don't know if we have to go to the legislature and ask them to change what our role is.

Would we want to do that?

I I'm not opining that we should, but just that I feel at times that we at local government are being asked to do something which is regional in nature.

Um, and I don't feel like that that is the right path.

We can all agree that we want good data centers, not bad ones.

We can figure out what the good ones are and what the bad ones are.

We can talk about, and you've already indicated they're not really using water like they did some years ago.

Uh Commissioner Rodriguez or is also positing a very important part that I had not put into full operation, and that is about how they will exist once decommissioned, right?

These are things that a person with the 25 or 30 years of fire experience would only know.

Um we have a lot to offer at this level, and we are the only body that sits regionally, and so that's why I think it belongs here.

I would like to know how to make it be here, and under what conditions we would operate or apply standards to make sure that bad dentists don't come here and we, if there are to be good ones that I don't know if they can come either.

I'm told by ND Energy that there is no power for them.

Um and so those are my thoughts.

Thank you for so much for the indulgence, madam chair.

Sorry to be all over the place.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh, thank you for those thoughts.

I think they're really good.

And uh certainly are trying to uh facilitate regional coordination on the topic.

I think I think we're gonna see it when we get to the schools item.

You know, we we took quite a bit of time with that item to try to understand exactly how can regional, well, where does regional fit?

How can we do some sort of rule setting?

And where we landed on that, I think is we see is an overarching policy approach in the plan that helps provide high level guidance to local jurisdictions.

And you know, I certainly don't think that this is, you know, we have the water uh threshold in PRS already.

I don't think we want to try to add any sort of particular condition to our PRS resolution, but there could be a recognition of our coordinated response as policy to set our you know our collective agreement on guidance.

And Dr.

Smith said so I understand is that the only trigger that water is.

Um that's currently the the only trigger in our rules for water.

There is a trigger at Tumwa that if a hundred acre feet is requested, then it is brought to the attention of the Tumble General Manager, who can then decide uh how they may want to proceed or or bring it to their board.

I will say that we are in currently in discussions uh on that topic with Tumwa staff, with Western Regional Water Commission staff and us to think about, you know, we're we're in the midst of a regional water management plan update, and we think that there could be an avenue, you know, there.

We certainly we're already looking at water use and population forecasting in our identified sustainable water resources.

And the thing that I keep talking about that many people talk about, but is that we are, you know, we're securing this future water for people.

And if we have high water using businesses of any kind that come in, how much does that affect our ability to deliver that resource to the population we expect?

And so that that's a focus.

I apologize, and you'll forgive the ignorance, and maybe Miss Doer can identify it.

I I'm not sure I understand what 653 uh trigger acre feet was, or uh yeah.

Like I I don't I I have no ability to sit here today.

Is it as big as this room and it's our it's it's very large.

Thing that is hard to understand.

It's about 1,200 homes worth of water on an annual basis.

Okay.

That makes more sense to me than the number.

I'm not sure it still tells me what I would need to know to make good policy choices, but you're you're exactly answering my question, and I appreciate that.

Sure.

Thank you.

Commissioner Anderson.

Yes, I'll be quick.

Um, I just wanted to echo um the support of what my colleagues have said here.

Um Mr.

Reese, I do agree that the policy and the best practices is best planned for and agreed upon here.

I'm not saying that it's gonna necessarily bleed into policy, but if we had a map and um a plan that you are so you know apt to provide us that gives us best practices and um potentially things that we need to worry about, whether it's water contaminants or special circumstances by zoning.

And when I say zoning, I don't mean by code in each of our municipalities.

I mean by zone in the region.

I think that would be really helpful because that would give any data center developer that wanted to come to the region a map of the things that we are concerned about, and we are gonna be measuring them by as to whether or not they would be considered in the region, right?

And also informs us as a region at what are the things currently and future that we need to be concerned about.

And then with your leadership at this at this um body, continuing to be educated about the things and bringing them back to us as best practices of what we need to be focusing on.

I think that becomes a regional plan that we can refer to as a best practice, and then policymakers, you know, in each of our municipalities can consider project by project, which are rare, limited, probably aren't coming, but at least we're we're all considering the same rules, elements, resources, and futures.

Um, so thank you for that.

And then one other thing I just wanted to mention, um, Mr.

Reese, I think that it's it's been confusing for me as a leader to read a what comes out in the media about Reno, as the national media likes to call the data center future of the United States, and then being a local, you know, um elected here that is looking at actually what's happening on the ground and what's actually available land, water, energy.

And then what we hear from our partners, our very valuable partners at EDON, 1,600 of us attended a luncheon last week where it was rah-rah, data centers are the entire future of the Nevada economy.

So it's hard for even the most educated of us that sit in all three of these areas to really delineate what is actually going on here.

And so I say that to appreciate every single one of us that has every single conversation, whether they're on the record or with any of the citizens that are rightfully concerned in this community about what is actually happening here in our region with data center, denial data centers and all the priceless resources that they're gonna require.

And so it's um I think absolutely critical that all of us work together and we are rowing in the same direction in terms of what we want and what we prioritize in this region, whether it's for data and energy infrastructure or the protection of our resources.

So thank you for the work that you've been doing here.

And I just want to thank everybody for the the difficult conversations that we've all had to kind of find our way into this lane, but we're all here together, and I think this is the exact place for us to be having them regionally.

So thank you.

Right.

In closing, and I'll address you, Commissioner Reese, in the City of Sparks, I can tell you that our Sparks staff is working with planning staff from the city of Reno, from the city uh from Washoe County and also from Truckie Meadows regarding all of these things so that policy looks the same going forward.

And then I'd also like to share as president of Western Nevada Development District, where we represent rural cities and counties, we are having that broader also discussion about this to make sure, again, that as they're coming into northern Nevada, that all of us are consistent and rowing in the same direction.

Okay.

Well, Madam Chair, that provides me a lot of comfort, right?

I I wasn't aware of that.

And it's part of it is that we all serve on different bodies and Western Nevada development district is super important, but really obscure, all very few people know exactly what it is.

I think Ms.

Anderson point may ultimately be the best one as a response to that.

We sat at that presentation by EDON.

You're absolutely right.

We heard all this stuff about data centers.

I took it to mean like Nevada when also maybe Western Nevada, but then when it came back to what is going on in Reno Sparks, unincorporated Washoe County or just Washoe County in general, I I it was disconnected for me.

Um and I felt it was a disservice because a lot of the slides seemed to be about like national trends, national implications.

Um, and so I couldn't get from that what I uh hoped we would do.

And now that you've said that, I I have much greater comfort.

Is there a way that we might receive um maybe an update at this body or okay?

Yeah.

Well, I will share with you that Western Nevada Development District are um our annual summit in Lovelock on March 31st is talking about data centers.

So we're bringing in experts on energy, on all of those things.

And the thing is is when they're saying, okay, we don't in I don't Washoe County may have, we don't have land large enough for a hyperscale.

Okay.

And that is what a lot of these are talking about.

I can share with you in Lion County, a farmer sold off 5,000 acres of farmland to a hedge fund that it will eventually turn into a data center.

So that's where I mean, I'm trying to learn because that's it's happening in our rural areas.

That's where you know they want to look at because they need larger acreage, okay, than we could possibly provide.

I can also say that in the City of Sparks, I did um in response to Commissioner Rodriguez, I did ask as we are looking to craft policy in the city of Sparks, that we do understand how they are decommissioning and how are we going to get rid of waste and things like that, so that we make sure that when we are reviewing these types of contracts and everything else, that hey, I you know, we know that every three to five years this happens.

Okay, what is your disposal plan?

Okay, and if you ever if you ever shut down, what is then your disposal plan of this big facility now?

So I'm I think and I agree with all of you that yes, we need to row in the same direction, and then also information sharing.

So um to make sure that all of us as we hear things can say, hey, you know, I heard this, I heard that.

I meet on a regular basis with the group that is concerned about data centers coming in here.

I've met with them twice since the beginning of the year.

And so that's the Sierra Club and Sarah Club.

Yeah, the fabulous people all working very hard.

Yeah, did I did not understand?

Do you have a moratorium currently in Sparks on data?

We do not.

The mayor was misquoted.

So imagine that happens.

I mean, imagine that I'll get misquoted.

And again, this is where it's a new industry.

Yes, and it's new for us.

I I totally understand.

And and again, you have given me so much today to be grateful for, Madam Chair.

I I do trust your leadership on the issue.

Um, I don't know that I can contribute anything to the additional information, but I'm happy to sit here and give whatever thoughts I have.

I I am looking forward to um our staff, Miss uh Susa and Mr.

Talley to understand it as it evolves.

I want us to be very um transparent.

This website seems to be a very good step in that direction.

And again, I think we've buried the lead today because what I took at the very top level is that there do not appear to be large-scale data centers that will or can locate here.

That that there's no media here today, and certainly they probably wouldn't care about that story, but it is the important takeaway for me today that you're working on it and that we aren't gonna miss something as they all rush in here and do the thing.

Um, I I think this has been a most important presentation for me.

Thank you so very much for it.

Yeah, and I have a follow-up comment.

Of course.

Um, I just wanted to say this is to Jeremy and your staff.

I I don't know that we are totally in alignment with where you see things, because what I heard some of our colleagues say is we still need you leading this charge for us.

And we we we we don't think putting the website is enough.

Okay, okay.

I mean, that's what I heard.

I think I heard Ms.

Anderson say, and Mr.

What's that?

I didn't realize it was over.

Well, that isn't that's right.

And I that was the second point.

I don't know that we all have an agreement that there's no data centers coming here, and even if they're small, we need to know if it's not something to worry about, then we need some general guidance on how to treat those.

I remember one came in and the people were going, oh my gosh, they're using eight acre feet of water.

And I kept saying, that is not that much water, just not that much water.

Um, that's about enough for 16 homes, okay, versus what you said earlier about 1200 homes.

It's just not that much water.

Okay.

In fact, um, a maybe up to 32 homes.

Okay, somewhere in that range.

20 to 30 homes, but it's not 200 and a thousand homes.

And so what I hear is that we still have to worry about the small ones, but we want to know how to do do we even regulate them?

Should we encourage them to go in a corridor?

Um what I think is that um I'll just repeat something I said earlier, which is about the energy use.

I'm worried even small can add up to big cumulative impacts.

Uh, this little bit of traffic, that little bit of traffic, this other, and pretty soon you have a log jam road, right?

But each one would say, Well, I didn't have to do a traffic report because my traffic did not rise to the level of needing a traffic report, but we know cumulative.

How do we get to a DRF intersection?

Like nobody had to do a traffic report, but the result was bad.

So, what I want to make sure is that we continue the discussion here and to Mr.

Reese's point, maybe earlier on the agenda, okay.

Not at one of our last items, but maybe the same level of attention as a school district report, you know, one of the first items, so that if the public is interested or media is interested, what we're talking about, they can come get it and go.

Um, but I don't know that we 100% agree with you that they're not coming here with with that statement, and that your work is done here.

That that when you finish the website, you're kind of done.

And so I'm just I'm kind of reading the group, but I just wanted to say those words.

Thank you very much for all the comments.

And I don't think that you know we ever think that our work is done.

No, uh, so but and honestly, uh for us, you know, we have a very clear mandate on the land use uh review for energy generation and transmission, and we don't even I mean, I think we've been open and honest that we don't think it's up to snuff and we want it to be better.

But no, I I'm not looking to necessarily abdicate um any leadership role.

I'm happy to continue to have this conversation here and provide guidance.

I think we're gonna see in the school's item that's exactly what we've tried to do is is create overarching guidance.

And so I I don't think it's off the table.

I just also know that as we've gone through some of these things, you know, we hear sometimes like let's make it a PRS or you know, do this, and and it's just very difficult to for us to operate with our staff and our resources and mandate in that space without the the local government.

But even if it was a PRS, which I don't know that anybody's suggesting that right now, if it was what we'd be looking for from you is okay, so what like what what steps?

If if something is that big and you review it, what are you reviewing it against?

Are there are there criteria?

Is there a guidance document?

How do you say thumbs up, thumbs down, or take a deeper dive?

I don't think it's enough to just say is it so big that it comes to our attention here, but even if it does come here, how are you going to review it?

Just say, okay, look good to us, you know, are you gonna say more?

Well, hopefully say more than that.

But uh appreciate it again, and I think it's going to be a collaborative effort with the local jurisdictions.

And I that's what I'm hearing.

And happy to come back and report on how we do between now and April 9th, which is our next meeting, you know, bring it forward and give it a little horsepower in between now and then.

And madam chair, may I ask, based on Miss Dewar's comment and Miss Anderson's comment, is there a possibility that we could have a best practices document?

Right, like a thing which would be a signal to the jurisdiction, or is that what's coming from your working group, uh, Ms.

Vanderwell?

Like I it would just be awesome if I have a policy manual though.

Yeah, isn't that where that would reside?

You have that or you're working on it.

We have a policy manual for this board.

Well, and I'm saying but for this topic, this topic, that's right.

I can tell you can I just weigh in as the old value.

All right.

I've been on this board since 2010.

This board exists mainly because you couldn't get along in the old days.

I want to put a rock crushing plant right next to uh 15 homes, you know, that didn't work.

So the that got in.

So uh senator came uh and said uh this is how we're gonna do it.

They're gonna set these parameters.

It's been pretty spot on since 1989.

Uh that we haven't really had big arguments.

Hug high school generated a PRS because of the amount of uh land and whatnot.

It turned out it wouldn't need to be under a PRS.

But then we had arguments for years on a PRS.

This body is supposed to be here, the keeper of the knowledge.

You guys are the ones that are are keeping the knowledge.

Where do we terminate on our water lines?

Where's sewer lines go?

Does this jurisdiction have power to this area?

Those things all reside in this area.

So when I make a phone call as XYZ company, then Jerry can Jeremy can say, Hey, yeah, we that piece of property has all the the this the uh ingredients you need for your project, and then that moves on from there.

This project, this is not anywhere near that.

I mean, just what we worked on back in the early teens was getting all the information in one place so that you could ask one question and not go to Reno Sparks and Washoe and get three different answers, or in some cases six different answers.

So uh this is where it resides.

I think this is nowhere near done.

It uh needs a lot of work, but it does can go back into the policy manual and say, and in essence, that's a best practices manual, and say, yes, this is how we recommend you deal with data centers.

And would that be binding on people legally as a thing?

That's what I don't understand.

I don't think Madam Chair, Jessica Fronty, for the record.

I've been listening carefully to the very thoughtful conversation in the comments from my legal perspective.

I think how I can be of use to this body is to prepare a memorandum that shows this body the options that I see under your statutory framework of what you can do, whether that's enacting a policy within the regional plan where you tell the local jurisdictions you must do XYZ as to data centers, whether you want to encourage um an adoption of some type of PRS trigger for certain types of data centers that would maybe be adopted by the regional planning commission, and then those of that certain size or limit would be coming forward as a project of regional significance.

I am going to do that, and I'll bring it back to you for your April meeting so that you understand your statutory framework, and then you can make your decisions within that.

I and the other part of this, and we're going to discuss it on the next item too, is we don't want to give up control of what you're doing within your own city.

Correct.

Right?

We're all unique in some aspect.

So we the this is a suggestion.

This is a policy, this is the best practice.

This is what we found out uh for PRS and this particular size of high school.

Why why did we construct it that way?

Well, and that was years and years of of talking and arguing and every other thing I did.

Whatnot?

I know what not.

Yeah, there we go.

But it's still the keeper of the knowledge resides with this entity, and that should be the one stop.

Hey, you have a question on this particular parcel.

Will it work for you?

Jeremy can answer that question.

And part of it is data centers for the future.

We didn't even know what a data center was in 2010.

Exactly.

Can I ask?

I can I ask on that memorandum.

Instead of just distinctly pointing out data centers, can we say high energy users or high water users?

Because I data centers are not the only high energy user.

So I think if you know we can do that, and it includes data centers.

Absolutely.

I will just basically be laying out your statutory authority.

And you've heard me say this many times over the years that this is a body of special and limited statutory jurisdiction.

And to Mayor Lawson's point, there's a fine line as to when you intrude upon local jurisdiction autonomy.

And that's what I my job is to make sure that line doesn't get crossed.

So I'm gonna try to provide you a useful memorandum to help inform your decision making on the substance of these items, whether it's high energy producing or high energy consuming anything.

Exactly.

Chair Van Vanderwell, can we also consider adding contaminant issues around?

Well, the thing is is if it's within if it's within our statutory, I'll defer to the attorney.

Okay.

So if it's high land use, energy, water, or contaminant.

That would be there may be some room for policy adoption in that realm, but we have to be careful.

Okay, that those items are not addressed within local jurisdictional concerns or otherwise by other state agencies.

So I look forward to what you think.

Well, madam chair, my last comment is, and I appreciated Mayor Lawson's comment, and I'll respond in this way.

This body has always been um quite um engaged and very gracious to one another.

I I enjoy serving with all of you.

Um we have people come on and come off.

I may someday not be on here, but I have found this group to be um and this group of electeds to very carefully work with one another across jurisdictional lines.

That's why I think it belongs here, and I'm grateful for your leadership once again.

Thank you.

All right.

Any more on this?

Okay.

Wait, beat it.

Thank you.

All right.

So I'm gonna go ahead and close that agenda item.

And we're going to go on to 7D update and possible direction to staff regarding the regional planning commission subcommittee to address regional coordination.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Jeremy Smith again for the record.

I'm gonna try and go pretty quickly through this for us.

Uh so next slide, please.

Too far.

Yeah, so uh following, thank you very much.

Following some some recent cases, there was concerns from the regional planning commission leadership that uh maybe there were some some gaps or things to address or at least research around how we do regional coordination could be uh would be an important thing for us to undertake.

I think in service of uh as to how we think about it anyway, in service of continuous improvement in doing our job, just like we just heard.

So uh just gonna go through um what we've come up with so far on this.

That led to the formation of a subcommittee of the regional planning commission that's made up of the current chair, the vice chair, and the immediate past chair, and all three jurisdictions are represented.

We've had one meeting in January uh with to look at this information very similar to this.

Got a little bit of direction, but wanted to make sure that we brought it back to this body just to ensure that you guys, this this body is on board with this direction.

And if you have any guidance that you'd like to provide or advice that we we check in and we can bring that back to the RPC subcommittee as well.

So there's a couple of ways that we do regional coordination.

We have both formal mechanisms and informal mechanisms.

We work formally with the three local jurisdictions and what are termed affected entities.

That's very formal through a conformance review process of the master plans and affected entity facility plans.

But with all organizations in the region, we have informal coordination activities as well that we do.

And so we just try to keep everybody talking and again rowing it in the same direction and bringing that information to bear as the foundation and context for why we make certain decisions.

Thanks for all that support.

And a lot of it was about regional coordination.

We added the concept of the tiers or regional land designations.

And that's a, you know, that does not have a jurisdictional bias.

That's a it's a density approach that really is a regional lens.

We added our facilities and services standard table to ensure that you know our vision of what public works and engineering and the services that can be provided at the time of the decision is being considered to the degree possible before the decisions are made.

Uh one of the things we also added with the tiers, uh regional TMSA.

The initial review memo has been a huge coordination piece for us.

So now with for for whatever reason, for many years, the agency did not opine in the beginning on any of the cases that were coming its way.

And so we just said that's silly.

And we want to make sure we're giving as much information as possible.

Day one, because we do happen at the end of the process, and we don't want to be the surprise negative agency.

Uh and we've also addressed um national resources, public infrastructure.

We're highly coordinated there now.

We're getting information about CIPs and about annual comprehensive financial reports, and we're just we're trying to build that information data set that Mayor Lawson was talking about.

And we've also added a lot of stats to our annual report, and we're keeping that up annually.

So I think we've we've dug in on the concept of regional coordination.

And just super quickly, we can run through all the different policies that are in.

We have an entire section of the policy chapter called regional coordination, and we do all of these things.

So uh in addition to the public infrastructure planning I mentioned and natural resources planning.

Uh, we oversee the annexation programs and this uh the regional planning commission acts as the annexation and deannexation commission.

Uh, we govern spheres of influence.

Uh legal counsel previously, I think mentioned that we have a couple of mechanisms, joint planning and cooperative planning.

Uh initial review memo, that's part of our coordination.

What are our review criteria for projects of regional significance?

Oh, we do the annual reporting.

We've got our conformance review and regional plan findings.

We can convene committees, that's what this RPC subcommittee is.

And we also had some subcommittees around PRS and schools previously.

Uh, we're involved in discussions around any federal lands disposal legislation that might be uh proposed.

We have in situ day tribal coordination policy to ensure we're talking with our tribal government partners in the region.

And of course, we're we're trying to provide this all online in the most detailed and easily accessible way possible.

So we have a lot of these mechanisms we're already doing, and I think we have improved how we go about that uh since 2019.

There really are two mechanisms in the regional plan that have existed for a long time that currently are not being used.

Uh they both do a similar function, and it's sort of creating an overlay area within the region where we want to have some higher interjurisdictional coordination occurring.

Uh, the two mechanisms are joint planning and cooperative planning.

And you can kind of think about that as like hard and soft.

The joint planning is very much uh in state law, defined, rigorous, and requires say joint meetings of the city council and county commission if that were to be the joint.

It's it's somewhat onerous, but can be appropriate.

And it was utilized for the TOD area of uh going north to the state airport when we had that area, the Reno Stead uh corridor joint plan.

You know, if we do see a large swath of land brought in uh for development via a disposal legislation, that could be a great candidate for a joint plan to see how we think that ought to go forward.

But it's very prescriptive.

Whereas we have cooperative planning, which I believe kind of came out of our settlement agreement that had occurred, and that since has sunset, and so we still have the mechanism, but it can be applied in in a way that we see fit.

I think we have some leeway at least in how we can go about it.

It's not as defined in state law.

And so this could be a mechanism that we approach if we feel like there are areas in our region that need a little extra attention and some more communication between jurisdictions.

I think the thing that's proffered this subcommittee is Cold Springs and the recent approval of uh land uses up there.

But you know, it could also be a buffer of jurisdictional boundaries.

I mean, we could just think about if we believe there's an issue to try to solve, cooperative planning could be a mechanism.

I think other options.

We we've kind of taken a break from the regional plan update working group because we accomplished the update back in 2024.

We typically turn that on about two years before the the next update is due, but that could be something we have more regularly.

So we're in ensuring that we're talking at that staff level in a very formal way.

Um we're working on this thing in the middle, the regional case dashboard.

So part of our GIS surge is going to be having uh a dashboard of all of our cases and what stage they're in and into the past on a map, on an online map, online on our webpage.

So you can go at any time and you can see, you know, sort of what have we done, what's in process, and and what's coming up.

So we think that's a really neat tool that we're gonna do.

And you know, we we're often involved in this commenting process.

I mentioned the initial review memos.

Possibly there is some way that communication can be enhanced.

I think again, we want to be very careful, and I've heard the comments today.

You know, we're not trying to get in and tell local jurisdictions exactly how to do things, right?

But we are we do want to reflect our collective wisdom and our collective understanding of of guidance and kind of formalize that.

So I think you know, we we're here to help.

We we have a small staff.

We try to do a lot, small but mighty.

And uh, we do want to focus on you know our GIS and getting that where it needs to go and our core functions, but regional coordination is one of those core functions.

And so if there are ideas on how we can do a better job, we want to make sure that we're approaching them.

We want to learn a little bit how how is coordination occurring outside regional.

So we're thinking about, you know, we're not really in the public safety sphere, but there's mutual aid agreements, you know, there may be protocols at the jurisdictions absent any regional uh information or or participation where there's already an enhanced process because you're within a certain distance of another jurisdiction.

So you do a courtesy call, or you know, we're we're gonna find out exactly what's happening there.

But those are things that are are worthy of consideration.

And so, in terms of next steps, uh based on whatever guidance you guys or information you might want to put out here today on this topic, you know, we're planning to take that and report back to that subcommittee of the regional planning commission in March, early March, and then even as early as the March RPC meeting, report back to the full board and see if there really are any extra additional steps that need to be uh taken on.

Um, and of course, we want to work with our local jurisdiction partners to make sure that they're on board.

And I think one of the things that we very much want to uh propose and stay with is that we don't want to be a burden, an unnecessary burden, let's say, on the local jurisdictions because they are already really highly pressed to accomplish all the things that they do.

And when we propose things, we hear that.

And so we're very cognizant of it, and we want to be able to support them within their existing systems to the degree possible.

With that, I'm just looking to hear your thoughts.

And if you have a motion and want to give us guidance, we're we're happy to hear it.

Thank you, Dr.

Smith.

One moment.

I just full disclosure to all my colleagues.

I attended this subcommittee meeting.

And I, in my opinion, from uh from my seat.

I think there is a opportunity for education for the local governments to educate their planning commissioners on the difference between how planning is handled at their local jurisdictions versus how planning is handled at regional planning.

So, and the different and the just the different mechanisms.

I believe that there are there are some planning commissioners that maybe that are fairly new to this, that they are trying to apply what they do at their local jurisdictions up here at regional planning.

So I just wanted to go ahead.

What I'm suggesting is I think there needs to possibly be some local jurisdictional planning, uh, planning commissioners to have them understand the difference between that at local levels, at our local level planning, we can institute conditions on things, but not here, but not here.

And and I think that's getting lost in some translation and some understanding.

Go right ahead.

Since you brought up the cold springs, um there was so much in the weed stuff in that whole conversation.

People are looking for a study that wasn't gonna be done for seven months, and we're gonna hold up a project because of a study that we don't know what it's gonna say.

But we're gonna hold up.

I mean, so there is some uh we had this issues at our re our planning commission within Sparks.

You're not a policymaker, you're an interpreter of the existing policies.

The policymaking, get yourself elected, then you get to make policy.

The but if you're read a planning commissioner, you're appointed literally by me that goes to our council, and then they vote.

So that I mean that's not a very high bar to all of a sudden become an expert when you're a retired policeman, you know.

Now I'm a I now I'm a city planner, so I should be able to look at water reduces and everything else that is so far in the weeds from what the project uh calls for that uh it it ends up costing that project more money.

Now, who pays the extra money?

The people that buy a house there, put a business in there.

They're the ones that are paying for that.

Why are we, you know, it it just makes no sense to me.

And then you throw it to the regional, and I have two planners from two other places in the valley that are gonna make decisions for Sparks.

I don't think so.

Those decisions need to be made here or at uh the Sparks City Council.

So I'm very adamant that there's no power, there they should have just the ability to interpret, and that's where Jessica comes in to make sure that they stay within their lane.

But I know it's easy to get outside the lane, and uh we've had I've had to replace a couple of planning commissioners because they they didn't get that message.

Madam Chair, Jessica Prenti for the record.

Um, of course, I was at the subcommittee meeting, and you know, in particular the RPC chair had some concerns regarding regional coordination and wanting to put in some hard requirements um that I advised were impermissible under state law.

And I believe that was heard.

Um, but just for this body's edification, what the process would play out here, and I had recommended that this item come to the RPGB so that you would be duly advised of what is happening down below and could provide any feedback because if you are absolutely opposed to policy adoption in the regional plan, for example, that in considering a project of regional significance, whether or not you're going to require the local jurisdiction who brought the project forward to consult with the other neighboring jurisdiction and making sure it complies with that jurisdiction's master plan.

This body needs to weigh in on that.

I already advised that that would not be a permissible policy.

Um but from a process perspective, we wanted to get feedback from this body, take it down to that subcommittee.

That subcommittee will make any recommendations for action or not and policy adoption to the regional planning commission.

And then, as you know, the regional planning commission, that's where the policies originate as far as making a recommendation to this body as to whether or not to make an amendment to your regional plan.

And so we wanted to get ahead of it.

That was my recommendation to see what the appetite of this body was, if any, to adopt any policies in that regard.

And then we can take this feedback to them.

And if they want to continue their work and think about it maybe in a different way, they could.

Dr.

Smith mentioned the cooperative planning overlay.

That's always an option if that's what this body thinks.

That would be require an amendment to the regional plan and a map of a cooperative planning area.

And what does that even mean?

What are the requirements?

What do you want out of cooperative planning?

There's already mechanisms in the regional plan that requires giving information to the local jurisdictions that are affected.

So I think that's what we're really seeking is information that we can take back to the subcommittee so they can continue or discontinue the work.

Commissioner Andriola.

Thank you.

Uh I think we all have um various experiences with wonderful people volunteering their time and wanting to do the right things.

Um, I'm glad Mayor Lawson, you didn't fire me from the Sparks Planning Commission.

I was not, and I think one of the things that is um something that I know I've shared with Dr.

Smith, I've shared with uh Miss Prunty.

I've shared with Washoe County in terms of my dedication to supporting the community, is that a lot of times folks mean well, and they're not necessarily given what I would call the clear boundaries of what their job is.

And a person who has a lot of experience in education and training, I think that we try to give all the information we can, and we expect them to make that leap.

And they all come from various backgrounds with various talents and various experience and good hearts.

But I think we we meaning all jurisdictions, I think could benefit, at least I know in Washoe County, we are going to start doing some what I would call um really extensive training when boards are appointed, especially in this case, we're talking about a regional board.

And so for Washoe County, as an example, we're looking at training at the BOA at uh at our planning commission and various other uh boards that fall into a capacity where they mean well, but they're moving into a direction.

And even though legal does a great job, thank you, Miss Printy, to share what those lanes are.

Um I I'm not sure necessarily they're coming really equipped with understanding even the consequences of their decisions and the legal exposure that actually is brought within that um those particular decisions.

So um I'm just gonna throw out that I think that um I'm not saying that training is gonna solve everything, but I think we need to think about that.

I think it needs to be done on a regular basis, even it's the same body.

I think it needs to be an annual basis.

I think there needs to be a real clear understanding.

I also think there's a benefit to doing it in the public forum, um, which is at least at Washoe County, I'm I'm highly recommending, so that we also can educate the folks that are coming that may have an enthusiastic approach to the decision to which they wish to have decided, and not necessarily the boundaries and the findings and the legal parameters to which they have to exercise.

So I think when you give someone that those expectations, they're doing the best they can with what they have.

And I think we have to do a better job, is my perspective on giving them the actual tools to make those decisions because um we all know that legal is there's a reason you're called council, and you can only give the parameters to which you're counseling, and some folks may need a little a lot more counseling, madam chair Commissioner Taylor.

Sure.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for the comments.

So I guess I'll just start at when I saw this um agenda item.

I thought, where what is this?

Where did it come from?

How did it get here?

So I asked our team to do a little bit of research.

And it is my understanding this came out of a particular case, which we heard here where a particular commissioner had said they were concerned about a perceived lack of coordination between the city and the counties, and the subcommittee was created.

So I think that Dr.

Smith and your team have put together a great presentation that actually defuncts that there isn't a coordination effort going on and proves exactly the otherwise at the other side of that.

And my direct comments would be to the regional planning commission that I don't think the subcommittee is needed.

Um I am very sensitive to time and resources and budget for everybody right now.

And I think based on what you presented here, we are seeing that the work is being done just because it doesn't come out the way some people want.

Um again, run for office, get elected and change the policy, but I don't necessarily see the need for this.

Those will be my comments.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Door.

Yeah.

Um I have to admit that I'm a little lost.

Um, I wasn't at their committee meeting, and I don't know exactly what problem they're trying to solve.

Like I understand that you know they were creating one to solve.

Uh okay, yes.

So um I so that they thought we weren't doing enough, I guess, regionally to address certain issues, be it traffic.

I'm just picking traffic as issue in every permit, right?

Every development.

Um, is that it?

They they want to do better.

I mean, uh, several people said they were well intended.

I heard several comments, but I don't know what they're well intending to do.

So, Jeremy, do they want to change the criteria that RPC reviews things by?

What what are they hoping to do?

Great questions, and thanks for the comments thus far.

I think we're we're trying to explore exactly what that is, but I do know that it the concerns were raised based on the interplay of existing unincorporated county residents in Cold Springs, and now the the new, you know, the the master plan amendment that came through for the portion that's in the city of Reno and talking about Stonegate.

Stone Gate, yeah, we're talking about Stone Gate.

And the sorry, uh the continu, you know, what's that gonna look like in terms of the what happens next?

The regional part is done that happened last year, right?

They didn't maybe didn't feel that it was addressed during the process to the level that they thought was necessary.

Well, here's something I'm seeing.

What what I am seeing, and I don't know if anybody else has seen it either in their jurisdiction or others, is that there does seem to me to be a disconnect between forget the the council, the planning commission, all of this.

There seems to be a disconnect between the people that were representing and the decisions that are being made at whatever level.

And the people uh as a as a as a group seem to be getting, in my opinion, more concern, more angry, feeling um more or less heard, and they don't see changes being made in response to their concerns.

So when whether it's being heard at our council commission or it's being heard in a planning commission, I have heard this over and over and over, and it's becoming a theme even in our current elections, right?

That the people feel that their representatives, they're maybe not challenging us and wanting to throw us out of office, but they are feeling they want new representatives because they don't feel like they've been hurt, and I just keep hearing it everywhere, whether it's in Cold Springs, which I do not represent, or you know, my ward, um, I hear it over and over.

And so I think it's that is probably what is filtering into this body, Regional Planning Commission.

And so they're trying to say how do we do better, how to be be more responsive.

And um, I I think you're right, uh Mayor, that you know, we appoint these commissioners, and I gotta admit I probably don't agree with my commissioner, probably 70% of the time, but I think that that she's a good person, well intended, uh has academics to be she is in planning, and I am not, and um I often don't agree with her, but I'm not I have it hasn't gotten so bad to your point that I'm replacing her.

Um, but I and I'm pretty sure I don't feel like she's even here in the public because she's more of an academic mind than a um an elected official, let's say, who we are supposed to be responsive.

So I that's why I asked, I mean, I'm very confused about exactly what problem.

I mean, I do understand what problem in a larger context, right?

It's floating all around our region, the level of growth, the threat of data center, whether it's real or imagined, the concern about traffic is huge in Reno on every project.

Um, we have a whole bunch of intersections that are rated D and F and F minus.

I mean, and and the disconnect between RTC working on big regional projects, but where's the actual fix at that local development site?

It's not happening, it's not happening generally.

Might happen occasionally, but it's not happening.

Anyway, I don't mean to be on a ramp, but I I am trust trying to identify what has prompted this.

Um I don't know if it's our purview to tell them to disband.

They they self-formed a committee, right?

And they want to know what to do, how they can have a better outcome.

I'm guessing.

Is that your takeaway, madam chair?

Is it you know, it was, and I'm gonna echo and I'm gonna agree with Commissioner Commissioner Andreola, is I uh it is.

I think what it is is maybe we don't do a good thing in maybe explaining to the public, this is the process, and uh and what the criteria are, and what the criteria is, and so until it comes until it comes in directly affects their neighborhood.

Uh you know, they kind of don't.

So the thing is is um, I think on in my opinion, I think honestly, at each of the jurisdictions, maybe we we need to message better.

Uh you know, I think that's what it is.

I think people just want, and at this point in time, people just want to be hurt.

There is a frustration all the way around because we have all of us have grown so much, and now it puts pressure on our roads, our infrastructure, and things like that.

Uh, but these were things that are coming to fruition today that were decisions that were made 20, 30, 40 years ago before we all sat in these chairs.

Right.

So, what we're trying to do is mitigate what is happening and going forward.

And uh, you know, maybe that is just better communication.

Yeah, but let me ask you one follow-up question.

So we do have a big problem out at uh on I-80 going out to Trick.

We we can't really ignore it.

And I was just on a panel uh with with Sam Shad about this issue about you know, using the rail and so and so forth.

I've been talking about it for 10 years.

It's not like I just dreamed it up yesterday.

Back when Stone Gate came, they have a rail landing.

I asked those folks, you guys gotta get serious about this.

It's a great opportunity to transport people out to Trick that are gonna live in North Valleys.

Why not?

But they said I I actually tasked the lobbyists and they said, well, Naomi, that's really your job as elected officials to get ahead of that thing.

Well, I don't represent North Valleys, I don't represent the area out towards Trick.

I I didn't know what my proper role was, although I'm very concerned.

I don't serve on RTC, but I do want us to do stuff, and I know we're all limited by money, and we all work on the base issue, which is how do we deal with the depreciation property tax issue as a big one, and then there's probably other small ones.

So, you know, I don't fault them, but I don't know that they're gonna solve the world or even move us an inch forward on this committee.

Commissioner Andriela, do you want to anyway?

Well, I was just gonna add, um, so can we just get clarification on this subcommittee in terms of um is this a legally required subcommittee that has been formed?

They set it up.

They set it up.

Jessica Prenti for the record, the regional planning commission and this body has the authority to establish subcommittees from time to time on whatever subject or matter you might want to do.

For this body's experience, the most recent subcommittee we had was the school subcommittee that then morphed into the PRS subcommittee.

I'm familiar.

So the Regional Planning Commission leadership identified had some concerns following Stone Gate.

And they decided to form a subcommittee consisting of three people, as Dr.

Smith mentioned.

The Regional Planning Commission is the technical advisory to this puppy.

So if we take back to them, the feedback from today, which is the regional planning government board has zero appetite to adopt policies to impose requirements of along the lines of what was discussed during the subcommittee, or a cooperative planning overlay at this time, or a joint planning area at this time.

That is important for them.

And then if they want to continue to have meetings and have a conversation, that's up to them.

You don't have the authority to tell them to disband, unfortunately.

But you do we can tell them, and this is why I wanted it to come to this body that there is very little chance that the regional planning governing board will agree with you and adopt these types of policies.

Well, I'm gonna concur with exactly what you said, and Commissioner Taylor as well, and everyone like great try.

Well, that would be helpful if that's consensus as well as a motion that's that.

No, I know that.

I know, but I'm just saying I'm only speaking for me.

Can I right now I'm only speaking for right?

So thank you.

Yes, I'm happy to make that motion.

Okay, and one of my, I mean, and the thing is is I guess what also needs to be relayed down uh to them is we have long-standing electeds that have sat on this board, but we also have planning commissioners and regional planning commissioners that now sit on this governing board.

Okay.

So I think that needs to I think that needs to be shared with them also.

So one moment and I'll let you make the motion.

Commissioner Rodriguez had a comment.

Uh thank you, ma'am chair.

I might uh I kind of feel the same as uh councilwoman Stewart, like oh, we'll spot this, but um there are some things like here, like uh to mayor loss' point, like information gathering, kind of like be the um go-to book.

So and I and one thing I really liked, and I know uh trustee Smith came and about for this thing.

I do feel like uh out there in Pyramid Lake.

I feel like that's kind of a community that is often I don't know.

I guess I'll say it's me just saying I feel it's often over overlooked.

A lot of our neighbors go out there recreate fish, hunt off-road, moon rocks.

And I would and one of the things for my other job is I know they're looking to lose their fire department.

There's not gonna be any fire service out there to include medical.

So kind of like to the point of information gathering, and one thing that I did like about this is talking to the tribes.

Uh to your point, mentioning emergency services.

So something happens down in Premier Lake, whether you're native or non-native, who's your closest help?

It's probably gonna be sparks if it's on 80 corridor.

Trucky meadows.

Um, so if you have a fire out there that requires three engines and a truck and you know, safety officer or battalion in chief, who's going?

Is it Sparks?

Is it is it TM?

Is it just TM?

So I think that's something that I would encourage that board or subcommittee to look at.

Um, because I know on the regional uh you know, Commissioner or sorry, councilman and I sit on.

That was something like Pyramid Lake's not being considered in that regionalization of fire, but that's still gonna be a service that I believe as good neighbors obligated to help.

So to um I would just encourage that subcommittee, regardless of the policies of the stuff like that, or to my colleagues to have those discussions that we want adopt our two sense of what but I would encourage if anyone is looking at that that that is your point, talking to our tribal partners and looking at the emergency services stuff as well.

Um, Commissioner Rodriguez, I just want to make a clarification.

You're requesting that subcommittee to the regional planning commission talks to the tribes and the regional agencies about potential fire services and MOU.

Well, it's as far as um uh I guess that's part of their job.

I mean, it was too fire service.

Well, to emergency services to like what's going on, like right, like hey, perma lake, you know, what's going on, like to coordinate with other entities formally and informally.

That feels more that feels more um senior level to me as a responsibility.

That's the reason I'm asking.

It feels like something that we should be doing and not what we should be requiring a subcommittee to do.

I'm just asking for the clarification.

And I guess uh um as is that something that we do.

Do we look do we do we as far as information gathering in this county as a regional group?

Like, does anyone know that Pyramid Lake is losing emergency services and it's only gonna be the two officers working?

So if there's a high-level crime out there, again, not native, non-native, native non-native, like who's getting help?

Like, is anyone that's where I kind of as a new guy here?

That's information I feel like we should all know.

You know, and then if if not us, then who should share that information.

Madam Chair, Jessica Prenti, for the record.

Uh we previously discussed that public safety is not within our regional statutory playground.

Okay.

Um there's a difference, I think, between having information and having outreach, um, which is already the tribal outreach and information is already embedded in our regional plan.

That was a creature of the last update, I believe, or maybe the 2019 update.

2024.

Yeah, to try to foster and make sure that you're looping them in in any land use development project that could have impact upon tribal lands.

Um gathering information about public safety facilities might be appropriate, but trying to regulate or develop policy around that is outside of our statutory.

I'm not suggesting that per se, but it's just kind of like to uh to Mary Lawson's point, like knowing that.

And that would be a staff level.

That would be a TMRPA staff level exercise, not the regional planning commission exercise.

Okay.

Okay.

Before we have to do that.

I'm learning every meeting.

All right.

So I'll be learning.

Um, I I will just share.

I'm I'm I do not have I do not see minutes of their meeting.

I don't, I wasn't at their meeting, I don't know what they talked about.

To I'm gonna call it informally to spank them and say you're having the wrong conversation.

Um, I feel uncomfortable.

Like, I don't know what they said, I don't know what they discussed.

I don't feel like I'm in a position to uh put them back in their lane, chastise them, uh you know, put guardrails on them.

I don't and and pre-dis pre-decide what we might or might not approve if anything ever came to us.

I I don't in other words to me, it seems like we're kind of impinging on their freedom of speech to if they can set up a subcommittee, and we can't disband a subcommittee.

And we can give them some advice like be cautious, don't um exceed your authority or what the authority of the agency is.

I'm all for that.

But telling them like stand down, disband.

I mean, they think they're solving a problem.

I I don't know.

I just uh I don't know enough about what the discussions are to say that was wrong, you shouldn't have done it, you should have done it some other way.

I just I feel incapable, and if that's our motion, I can't really support that motion.

If our motion is to get them in their lane, give them some guidance on you know what the agency does, do further education to your point, madam chair.

I I'm all for that, you know.

So um Jessica Pranny for the record again.

I think those are great points.

One can't disband the subcommittee.

We can take the information, the comments, and the feedback.

It doesn't have to be formalized in a motion that was said today back to that subcommittee.

Then that subcommittee committee has to take it back to the regional planning commission as a whole.

That body as a whole will decide whether or not they want to adopt any of the recommendations of the subcommittee, whatever they may be.

I don't know if they're thinking about trying to propose policy language or what they have in mind.

We don't know if that's yet to be determined.

If it gets that far, and if the regional planning commission is saying, like that, this is a great idea, then it's gonna come back up to this body.

Right.

Um and oh what we'll try to do from our part is really emphasize the sentiments that we have heard today, so that they know that possible things might be non-starters possibly, um, and staying in our statutory lane.

Right.

That's my motion.

What does that mean?

Right there.

That's my motion right there.

Thank you.

And with a big thank you for allowing the opportunity to have discussion and and and feeling valued and looking at the training opportunities in education.

And and um, you know, so there's my motion.

Okay, we have a motion on the floor.

Can I get a second?

Okay, I have a second.

Any further discussion?

Just want to make sure she said a lot of words.

I I just want to make sure what your intent is, Clara, that they just we we get some feedback back to them about the discussion here.

Absolutely, totally supportive.

And understand the statutory framework, and then look at a possible education opportunity.

Yes.

There you go.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

If there's no further discussion, please vote.

Okay, thank you.

Now we're gonna move on to 7E presentation and discussion of possible amendments to policy PF8 school requirements and approval of a memorandum of understanding with the state public charter school authority.

Thank you, Madam Chair, Jeremy Smith for the record.

Excited to be at this item.

Appreciate uh the one of the reasons we put it.

Six.

Yeah.

Uh at the the end is to uh facilitate participation by the director of the state public charter school authority, Melissa MacDon, who is now on the line with us.

Uh, really excited.

I want to start with really just this sentiment, a slide from the past, trusting the process, right?

I want to say thank you.

I want to say thank you to uh past Chair Andreola for your leadership, to Chair Vanderwell, Trustee Smith for being with us every step of the way, helping to guide it, Mayor Lawson, Councilman Dure from way back helping us get started with legal counsel and everyone along the way.

I mean, WCST staff, staff that's here from the local jurisdictions, our staff.

I mean, we we've all we've been working on this for a long time, and it's in service of trying to get it right to do the right thing and and to really, you know, continuous improvement.

I think that's exactly what we're trying to do in the previous item as well.

So big thank you.

And I will also say that uh I have never tried to put forward an MOU before, and I think I learned quite a bit on this process.

So hopefully, if I do it again, it'll be a little smoother.

So thanks for your patience with me on that.

Okay.

Um, in terms of background, I kind of mentioned it a bit there, but it's been a multi-year effort.

I mean, remember, I was watching VHS tapes and listening to audio recordings talking from from the 1990s talking about this issue.

So it's not new, and we have come a long way in working together.

I think we've built an amazing relationship with uh Wash County School District and the facilities plan review.

You heard it from Adam earlier today.

I thought that was very uh very helpful.

But you know, as we went through this, again, this is where we kind of started to understand the limitations of our resources and what we can do and why certain mechanisms work for some things, but maybe not for others.

And I think we found in in this one that the PRS mechanism was inappropriate, and so we've taken kind of a another approach, and it's really these two things.

So, what we're trying to do today is two things.

Number one, we are looking to formally adopt a memorandum of understanding with the state public charter school authority, and that's why Melissa's on the line here to help answer any questions if you have them.

This is very similar to what Chris covered during the data center or high energy user, excuse me, presentation, which uh which is that we don't govern everything, and it's specifically in state law that state entities are not subject to the regional plan.

So, but clearly charter schools have a role to play in the education domain here in the Trucking Meadows, and we have a role in reporting that information and helping to again align our collective response to approvals or requests.

And so we're very excited to be starting a relationship, formalizing a relationship with the state entity that doesn't necessarily have to deal with us to do information sharing and to stay connected.

And I will say that uh learned a lot about how that uh agency works, and it's been excellent working with Melissa again, who's on the line and and developing that, and I think a lot of positive things to come.

So uh hopefully you've had a chance to look through the MOU and what's in there.

It is is really about sharing information about new charter applications, notices of intent, expansions, folding that information into the regional plan products like the public infrastructure plan, and then returning that back to the community and to the state charter school authority and the school district and everyone in our public infrastructure plan and annual reporting.

So that's kind of the MOU path we're on today.

We want to get that adopted and and really formalize the start of that relationship.

And then further, we just wanted to give you a window into where we're at with our other arm of this effort, which is to create the overarching policy in the regional plan and really just amend an existing policy that we already have that speaks to what came up already in the conversations today about regional planning acting as the formalizer of our collective wisdom.

We've been talking about this together at the staff level, at the commission level, at this level.

We've all agreed that these are the things we want to see safety, right?

We want to understand the traffic impacts.

We want a public process.

And we're not top-downing that we are reflecting our our collaboration with this policy idea.

And so we're gonna show you where we got to so far on that, but it is in process.

But Melissa and I would be happy to answer any questions you might have on the MOU front.

Uh but moving on to this policy um idea.

Again, this policy is already in existence.

We have something called school requirements.

It's public facility policy eight, section three of the policy, chapter three.

And uh it basically is is oriented around keeping uh smaller schools, 1200 student population or less off arterials.

That is the main th uh kind of crux of the policy today.

But um we're looking to to strengthen it and provide this guidance.

And you can see the example at the very bottom, then we have a policy in the regional plan that says local jurisdictions in their master plans must address uh hillside development on slopes from 15 to 30 percent.

We don't tell you exactly how to do that, but we all recognize that that is needs to be done because there are considerations for sloped areas and development.

And so we're memorializing it in the plan.

How exactly it happens at the local jurisdiction is up to the local jurisdiction.

Doing it is what we all have agreed to do, and that's why the policy is ensconced in our regional plan.

So here is our current truncated language, right?

The the italics is directly from the policy draft that we included.

But I'll just read it.

In order to promote a regionally consistent approach to the approval of school locations and to help mitigate potential impacts, local government master plan shall include management strategies and/or policies which address the following components.

Again, not how, but what, and in this case, some sort of public process so that it gives residents an a chance to opine and provide their comments to the approval process.

Number two, when traffic studies are required, and of course I'm willing to hear your feedback if we want to say we must have traffic studies, or you know, but again, right now that's a local process.

They decide at what level of student capacity the traffic uh study is required.

But we're saying when you do the traffic study, please be sure to be considering the cumulative impacts, not just the one school, but all the schools nearby it and schools that are planned nearby it, and bring that to bear when you report on the traffic, and finally, uh safety measures that we already heard come up today, which is really about pedestrian access for for students.

We also have this language in there that is about speed control mechanisms for safety, but not putting them on arterials.

You know, that's becoming tougher and tougher to do as land becomes more and more limited.

So we to some degree have softened that language from a must to a should.

It and that's not reflected here, it's in your packet.

But this is a draft.

And so what we're looking for is you don't have to have all the answers today, but now you've kind of been made aware of our approach.

We want to get the feedback, we want to bring it back to the local staff, to the school district staff, talk with Melissa at the state authority.

But this guidance that's gonna be this policy will apply to all school types private schools, charter schools, public schools, all schools, any approval in any of the jurisdictions.

That's the idea.

But exactly how you do it is up to you.

Yeah, with that, I'm I'm happy to take any questions, and there's a motion upstairs there.

Jeremy trade schools, we got some of those in Sparks too.

Community colleges.

I think we could be you know advanced learning centered.

We have uh some labs.

Um just thinking right in our industrial area that uh we talking all schools, we talk on just a category of schools.

So far, I think we've been focused on elementary, middle, and high schools.

Okay, um, as are the category.

Uh, but we can we can work towards a definition of exactly what's included.

I think that's important because they once again create traffic, they create pedestrian problems when when we have that when you have traffic and people that often don't mix.

So I think I think we should look at all of it.

We're gonna do it through the whole thing.

Okay, and then we get another bite at this apple.

This won't be a final draft.

This there will be a final draft that would come back to 100%.

You'll you'll vote on the final draft.

This is it'll be like October probably.

And I'll make a motion.

Okay.

Hold on.

I was just kind of me.

I'm sorry.

I'll get go ahead.

I I just wanted to understand the pre two slides before.

Yeah.

Or you was the guidance that they you said something about holding a public meeting.

Yeah, well, yes.

So explain it just absolutely.

Yeah, let's go back to here.

So there's three bullets.

That that italicized portion at the top is in the current draft of the policy.

Okay.

And we had we've gone through this is version four or five of this.

And it initially it said hold a public hearing, but I was informed that that was a little handsy from us.

And so I I've made the guidance a little looser to have a public process because my understanding right now is that there is no process currently at the city of Sparks or the unincorporated county uh that guarantees public participation for school approval.

So we should have a public process.

Exactly.

And in two thirds of our jurisdiction, so there is not.

And we added not always.

I think there can be.

We added one based on the size of a school.

We said regardless of what school you are, if you're this big, you need to go through a public process, right?

Yes, that's right.

Okay, so that's an easy ad.

I guess if that's what you're recommending, we already did it.

You might want to consider it at County and Sparks.

Okay, I just want to make sure I understood what the recommendation was.

Yep.

Go ahead.

Go ahead.

I was just gonna add, uh, you know, for 10 years, a long time ago, I was the chair of the commission on post-secondary education, which is the licensing authority for the entire state of Nevada for any school that doesn't fall within the statutory requirement of other schools, essentially.

So trade schools, those kinds of labs, those adults, and um certainly reaching out to them would be I think advantageous that you could then you know that that's a nice trigger because they go through a huge application process, a very thorough process that is again defined by statute.

But I'm just throwing that out.

If you're not aware about the commission of post-secondary education, they exist.

Thank you.

Commissioner Robrius.

Thank you, Madame Chair.

Uh, I guess like the traffic study part, if um that this is the body to look at you know those triggers, like um maybe some ideal language I like to my colleagues to weigh out if you're X amount of miles or feet from a neighbor's neighbor jurisdiction.

Like if you want to put a uh a trade school on Pyramid and Eagle Canyon, it's going to affect both Washington Corporate Washoe and City of Sparks or some Milan McCarron between Reno and Sparks.

Like we go, we all border each other.

So um, you know, it's so it'd be kind of odd to have a public process and Reno's okay with it here, but it could possibly affect or bleed over to neighboring jurisdiction.

That's a suggestion there.

Thank you.

Go ahead.

Thank you, madam chair.

Yeah, I would like to just um plus one what commissioner Lawson and Commissioner Rodriguez said.

So the school district looks forward to still continuing on.

That's my understanding.

We'll continue to have small group meetings.

Um, some particular areas that I wanted to get on the record was really exploring that public process.

Uh, we of course understand that from the school district that schools can be placed in locations where, for example, we have Doral that can affect multiple jurisdictions, and so we do think that there needs to be some um clarity around that, whether that's any type of school.

So I agree with that.

Really wanted to explore the public process as well.

So we'd like to do that in the small group meetings.

That can look very, very different.

Um, also the amount of area around that communities are alerted can be really different.

So those are things that we would like to explore in those additional meetings, and then also ensuring consistency um across the board for all types of schools.

So those are just some of the things that the group will hear when we reconvene those stakeholder group meetings, but otherwise, we're very pleased and grateful for the progress.

Thank you.

Uh Melissa, do you have anything you'd like to add?

Not sure.

I don't sure if she's on there.

Hi, Melissa.

Um, this is Jeremy.

Are you still with us?

Yeah, you're all sorry.

Yes, I am uh I couldn't find the mute button on my phone or the unmute button.

Nope.

I'm I don't have any comments, just here to answer questions.

Should you guys have any and want to, you know, thank Jeremy for the thoughtful partnership on this, and it's been a pleasure to work with him.

Thank you.

And then it was at all of our seats and everything else that we did get.

Um we did get a thank you letter from the chair of the state.

So um perfect.

So uh I'll defer to legal.

Do you still do you still want just leave it in one?

Perfect.

Great.

Okay, so are there any more yes?

I have a question.

You yes, Mayor Lawson said we're continuing to work on this, but this looks like we're adopting this memorandum of understanding.

So I'm a little confused.

I can clarify.

We have there's two components to this item.

There's the approval by this body of the memorandum of understanding, which has been negotiated, uh embedded and ready to be signed off upon.

Right.

Um that's one item.

And the other item that Mayor Lawson was referring to is the actual policy that may be adopted by this body and incorporated into the regional plan, which will be essentially as conceived right now.

It will be direction to local governments to have policies in their master plans regarding public process, the traffic concern, whatever it is that is ultimately ends up in that policy that was.

Well, it says insert feedback here.

What were you looking for any change or uh I was looking for feedback on the policy?

So legal counsel itself.

Yeah, the policy portion.

So the MOU is baked, and we just want you to say we approve.

But on the uh policy side, that's open and still in process.

We're just giving you an updates and it's related.

So that's why they're both here.

But if you want it to split into two motions, I think that would be appropriate.

I sure can.

Okay, uh this is on my concern with approving a memorand understanding before we have a policy.

Yeah, I uh I think we're little cart reward.

So the memorandum of the understanding is simply to solidify an informational sharing arrangement with the state public charter school authority, so that regional planning will be receiving information from them as far as where charter schools intend to be located, and that is part of the long-term planning goals of the agency to get data collection, data warehousing.

That's the memorandum understanding.

It's kind of the standalone.

Once that's done, Jeremy will be coordinating with the state public charter school authority receiving information.

His team will analyze it, embedded throughout the GIS systems.

The second thing that we have is a policy in a just an initial draft right now that kind of a heads up to this body.

That I think the feedback has already been given.

We've heard from members of the body, we've heard from trustee Smith, and then it will go back down to the regional plan working group um for further discussion for the refinement.

Once everyone, those stakeholders are comfortable, it will go to the regional planning commission for consideration, and then that planning commission will make a recommendation to this body on proposed language for this body to adopt.

And at that time, you can say no, go back to the drawing board planning commission, bring us back something else.

So we're a ways away from the policy adoption route, but we are ready to proceed with the adoption of the MOU because we are now into this calendar year, and Dr.

Smith is and his team are ready to start gathering information from the state public charter school authority.

So, what we can do is have it two separate motions, okay, so that it's separate and it's concise and we understand what's going on.

Are we comfortable with you know responsibilities in 3A?

We have to reply within 15 days.

We're good with that.

Uh yes, we are exactly.

I mean, I just obviously I was out of town, so I'll I didn't get to read the whole thing, but I'm gonna let Jessica guide my vote on this one.

Maybe I could just add one one more point of clarity.

It's it's really goes back to the idea that the Washoe County School District is an affected entity, and we do a conformance review of their facilities plan against the regional plan.

Very great process.

We're working together great.

We've talked for a long time about where do charter schools fit into that you know program.

They are not an affected entity, the state agency.

So Melissa and I and the collective team have been working to create the MOU just to formalize the fact that we're gonna work together.

Okay, I mean, so one more question.

I guess when you get this information, how is it getting shared over to the jurisdictions?

And right now, this doesn't include the requirement for any kind of meeting, right?

That's correct.

This is just to say you guys approve of the fact that we're formalizing this relationship.

We're gonna bring any information we get from Melissa and team, we're gonna incorporate it into our public infrastructure plan and annual reporting.

But I mean, do our staff have to go parsing through and see if there is something, or are you gonna we're we're working together, we'll push out our regular products, they're gonna push out basically mainly email listservs, and it's very similar to the information if not exact that the Washoe County School District is already receiving per state law from the state agency.

Yeah, but we currently just don't have no, we just have an informal relationship and we're looking to formalize.

Okay.

Um, just uh for the record, madam chair.

The MOU is structured a bit differently.

The intent is to get the same information that the school district gets, but the wording is different than the NRS that guides the relationship between the state public charter school authority and WCSD, or really any of the other 17 districts.

That guides the relationship between the state public charter school authority and WCSD, or really any of the other seventeen districts.

So there's unique language in there to you, but that is the intent.

Are we good?

All right.

Commissioner Angela.

Well, I never thought we'd get this day, so I'm going to make the motion.

Those were a lot of meetings, and thank you.

Um, Trustee Smith for all your leadership in that and the entire team that worked hard, and then all the folks that worked prior to.

So this will be a short motion, because I'm only going to do the first one.

I move to adopt the memorandum of understanding for information sharing between TMRPA and the state public school authority.

Great.

So I have a motion.

Can I get a second?

Okay.

Commissioner Rodriguez.

Okay, any further discussion.

Okay, please vote.

I Commissioner Andrello, would you like to do the second one too?

I can give it a try.

Um it's going to be pretty general.

So uh I move to adopt and uh actually incorporate, right?

To provide the following feedback that was shared today.

Perfect.

How about that?

That's perfect.

Is that all right?

All right.

There you go.

So I have a motion.

Okay.

I have a second.

Any further discussion.

Okay, seeing none, please vote.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Thank you, Melissa.

Appreciate everybody's hard work on this.

Next, we're going to go on to number eight A, Warshaw County School District Board of Trustees Member Report.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I wave my report in the interest of time.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Okay, next we're going to move to eight B.

Member and Director's Report.

Likewise, I'll wave.

I'll just say that our next meeting will be here April 9th.

Terrific.

All right.

Next, we're going to move on to C legal counsel report.

Nothing to report, Madam Chair.

Great.

Okay.

Board comments and requests for future agenda items.

Okay, seeing none.

Next public comment.

We have none.

All right.

Thank you.

Written correspondence.

Uh no, there's none.

Okay, thank you.

We're adjourned.