Good morning, everyone.

It is March 10th at 10 a.m.

and I'm going to call the Washoe County Board of County Commissioners meeting to order.

And I'd like to ask for a roll call, please.

Would you like to salute the question?

We can salute the flag before the roll call.

Thank you.

Why don't we do that?

Mr.

Daly.

Thank you.

We'll move to roll call.

Thank you.

So Chair Andreola.

Present.

Vice Chair Garcia.

Here.

Commissioner Hill.

Here.

Commissioner Clark.

Commissioner Herman.

Here.

County Manager Kate Thomas here.

DA Mike Large.

Present.

And I'm Jan Galluscene, your county clerk.

Madam, you have a quorum.

Thank you so much.

And just to let everyone know, um, if anyone is here for the public hearing, we are going to have a time certain on that at 1 p.m.

So I just wanted to remind anyone that is here for that, just to be aware.

So we'll move now to public comment.

Okay, Madam Chair.

We are on item number three, public comment.

And comment heard under this item will be limited to three minutes per person, and it may pertain to matters both on and off the commission agenda.

A news time may not be allocated to other speakers.

The commission will also hear public comment during individual action items with comment limited to three minutes per person.

Comments are to be made to the commission as a whole, and virtual public comment may be taken when facilities are available.

Thank you.

First up, we have Harry Swinson followed by Thomas Daly.

Good morning.

Thank you very much for allowing me to address the chair.

My name is Harry Swenson.

I live year-round in Incline Village.

I'm one of the applicants for the advisory planning commission of the TRPA governing board.

Thank you for this opportunity and encouraging full-time residents of the Tahoe Basin to apply.

It is important that the person selected appreciates the wonder of the lake while also understands the realities of living there.

Residents face constant concerns of wildfire risk, complex evacuation planning, heavy snowfalls that affect transportation, and summer traffic standstills on our mostly two-lane roads.

We also understand and see firsthand the challenges of housing affordability for our workforce, needs of our school children and seniors, and impact of the millions of visitors who come here each year.

These issues that full-time residents experience and understand in a very direct way.

It is essential that the appointee is able to understand and clearly communicate science behind those policies and their impact.

TRPA plays a critical role in protecting the lake, the jewel of the Sierra, and ensuring that it is sustained for future generations.

At the same time, there is sometimes a perception among the residents that regulations can be onerous or unevenly applied, and improving understanding and communication around these issues is very important.

Looking forward, challenges such as transportation congestion and emerging concerns like microplastics deserve continued attention and research.

Visitor education is uh is also critical so that everyone that comes here understands the responsibility to protect the lake.

My family has been coming to the Lake Tahoe since the 1960s.

I have been fortunate to live here for the last 12 years after a career of NASA focused on science, technology, and management.

I hope to bring these experiences along with my deep love of this place to help protect the lake for generations to come.

Thank you for your time and this opportunity.

Thank you.

Thomas Daly, followed by Terry Brooks.

Thank you, and good morning, Commissioners.

For the record, I'm Thomas Daly, a resident of Washoe County and a former Washoe County Planning Commissioner.

I would ask that my comments today be entered into the record of this meeting.

Later in your agenda, you will hear an appeal by World Properties seeking to overturn the January 6th decision by your planning commissioners, denying a tentative map and special use permit for the project known as Sierra Reflections in rural Pleasant Valley.

This project is proposed for construction on an unremediated EPA designated superfund site contaminated with mercury.

As the applicant has pointed out in their appeal, this will be a de novo hearing.

So one requiring your review not only of the applicant's appeal, but of the entire development process.

That would include the planning department's analysis and tortured recommendations to approve with conditions.

This project and the public comments by dozens of opposed Pleasant Valley area citizens, engineers, scientists, and former regulators among them.

They have standing and they would suffer irreparable harm should this project proceed.

This application was so deficient that the planning department needed 26 pages of conditions outlined in Exhibit A of the staff report to generate a positive recommendation to approve with conditions.

This effort by the planning department suggests they became an advocate for the applicant rather than a dispassionate judge of the application.

Getting this application over the finish line with a positive biased recommendation became the only outcome for the planning department, while simultaneously ignoring the development code's requirements to meet certain findings.

Not a single planning commissioner could make the required findings, an unprecedented rejection of the planning department's recommendation.

Your deliberations today should reach the same conclusion.

This project would, if approved, represent a clear and present danger to your constituents.

Washoe County does not need its own toxic love canal.

I urge you to support your planning commissioners and deny this appeal.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Terry Brooks, followed by Curtis Coulter.

Good morning.

It's me, Terry Brooks again.

And today I'd like to engage in the topic of discrimination when it comes to politics and age.

There have been some politicians who have declined to help the elderly people, but would rather just leave them behind.

In the year 1965, some politicians supported Medicare, which helped a lot of elderly people to receive a lot of health care.

But there were some politicians who did not support Medicare for the rich to help support the elderly.

They did not think was fair.

People who are elderly are more susceptible to illness, such as the coronavirus that caused a lot of elderly illness.

Some politicians say our health care system has been biased against the elderly, while others say that the federal government should not help the elderly.

When a lot of elderly people are sick and about to die, and some politicians don't want to help them, I just have to wonder why.

Everyone has a right to live and to do so in good health, even if they're elderly, regardless of their wealth.

If someone doesn't want to help someone else who is in need, why don't they help them?

Is it because of their own greed?

Maybe it's because they don't want such people to help make the selection when it comes time to vote in the next election.

When it comes to elections, the elderly are more likely to vote and are more likely to control the government because of their vote.

And because they have such influence when putting candidates in office, then they might be more likely to put more elderly people into office.

Our elderly population keeps continuing to grow.

And when it's time to go and vote, they're more likely to do so.

I would like to thank you all for listening to me today.

And I will keep all this in mind when I vote on election day.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Curtis Coulter, and I have handouts to distribute, and followed by Beverly Silva.

Good morning.

My name is Curtis Coulter.

I request my written comments be entered into the record.

I'm addressing Sierra reflections, Nevada law and facts pertaining to master plans and zoning.

In 2006, the Nevada Supreme Court issued the case of sustainable growth versus jumpers, and it held master plans must provide a pattern and guide for orderly physical growth and development of the county.

And the zoning regulations must be in accordance with Nevada master plans.

Nevada Statute 278-250 requires zoning regulations be adopted in accordance with the master plan for land use and be designed A to preserve the quality of air and water resources, B to promote conservation of open spaces and the protection of natural resources, including scenic resources, and to protect life and property in areas subject to floods.

NRS 278-160 states an analysis of the characteristics of the land that is suitable for residential development must include a determination whether the existing infrastructure is sufficient to sustain the current needs of a projected growth of the projected project and the growth of the community.

Land use analysis must ensure the development is commensurate with the character and physical limitations of the land.

The development here requires significant alteration of the natural topography by cutting hilltops, filling valleys and meadows with over four million cubic yards of terrain.

A finding cannot be made that the scenic views will be preserved or that the development is within the physical limitations of land.

Land use must also promote health and general welfare.

The developer cannot ensure that the high levels of mercury will not be disturbed to contaminate neighboring properties or be carried downstream to contaminate other properties.

The county must also ensure the protection of the character of the existing neighborhoods, which are rural.

The developer will not look at you and state honestly that the development will preserve the rural nature of the adjoining neighborhoods.

A finding that the development is compatible with and will preserve the character of adjoining neighborhoods cannot be made.

A finding cannot be made that the existing infrastructure is sufficient to sustain the current needs of the projected growth of the community.

The closest transportation, public transportation is more than five miles away.

The closest substation for the sheriff is at Incline Village.

A burned out fire truck still sets at the north side of the proposed development.

Sierra Reflections wants to import water from different basin.

A finding that there will be no damage to the existing water supply cannot be made.

The proposed plan does not comply with the Nevada law.

The master plan zoning, NRS 278-250, NRS 278-160, and it does not consider the infrastructure needed for urban development in a rural setting.

Please affirm the unanimous decision of the planning commission and deny this project.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Beverly Silva and she has documents to be distributed, followed by Drew Rebar.

Yeah.

Good morning.

My name is Beverly Silva, and I'm a homeowner in St.

James's village.

The Sierra Reflections appeal asks you to accept significant impacts while offering vague assurances and no enforceable protections.

Let's start with traffic.

The project adds 940 residential lots.

Conservatively, that's 1900 additional vehicles using a limited road network that already experiences congestion.

Washa Valley has no redundant routes, no meaningful capacity for expansion, and no realistic mitigation for peak hour traffic, emergency response or evacuation.

The impacts are obvious and permanent.

Next is sewer infrastructure.

The appeal admits the wastewater treatment plant upgrades will be necessary, yet it does not clearly commit the developer to pay for them.

This project, combined with future development in St.

James's village and throughout Washa Valley, will push the systems beyond the current capacity.

If the developer is not fully and contractually responsible for these upgrades, the burden shifts directly to the county and then the existing taxpayers.

This is not responsible planning.

The housing ladder argument does not withstand scrutiny.

There is no evidence that current residents, many low, many who have low interest rates will upgrade and move into the Sierra Reflections home.

There's no guarantee that those homes will then sell and become affordable.

And there is no binding affordability requirement tied to this project.

This is not a housing solution.

It's a talking point.

The question you should be asking is simple.

Who actually pays?

The answer is not the developer.

Costs are passed on to the builders, then to the buyers, then when infrastructure fails short and falls short, the county and then the taxpayers.

The developer assumes minimal long-term risk while the public assumes all of it.

And finally, future intent matters.

Approval creates value, value that can be sold.

If approved, St.

James Village and Sierra Reflections can be sold and transferred to a new developer who can seek to amend existing agreements.

For St.

James Village, most existing parcels have a proximity to a busy freeway with no rational market supporting a one-acre custom homes.

The only viable outcome would be more high density development.

And that is not what St.

James residents agreed to.

This appeal ignores cumulative impacts, shifts financial risk to the public, and relies on assumptions rather than enforceable commitments.

This is not true private investment.

It's cost deferral leaving the public exposed once the original developer exits.

Please uphold the unanimous denial by the planning commission.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Drew Rebar, followed by Jay Howard.

Drew Rebar for the record.

I'm a candidate for Nevada Assembly District 40, which would represent the areas that we're talking about here.

I've been uh talking to people for the last couple of years in my run for for this this office, so I've I've got a lot of community contact in the areas, especially because I live in Washoe Valley.

I drive past this every single day, as was mentioned, the fire truck that's been there forever.

I I bought property out in this area because it is rural.

If you're going to develop anything out there, you need to maintain the rural character.

That's what the people in, that's what the voters in this area want.

I haven't heard anybody that I've talked to in my community, Osho Valley, Pleasant Valley, all of those areas that want this.

The voters are against it.

Not to mention the legal issues that have been brought up here by the previous speakers.

So I'm going to keep this short, let everybody get move on with their day.

I urge you to vote against this project to shut it down.

If they want to build out there, go back to square one.

Keep it rural.

Personally, what I'm concerned about is my water and my well.

Since I've been out there, there used to be two fire stations out there.

Now we're down to one.

But we're going to add almost a thousand homes.

I don't think it's a very smart idea.

Thank you very much.

You have a great day.

Thank you.

Jay Howard, followed by Christopher Wood.

Good morning, and thank you to the commissioners for allowing me to speak this morning.

Um, please consider my name is Jay Howard.

I'm a Washa Valley resident, been out there for 31 years.

Um, been in Nevada, this part of Northern Nevada for over 60.

And um, please consider my comment regarding possible action with respect to the Sierra Reflections application.

I request that any action be denied once and for all and identified as incompatible with the land and the resources of the Truckee Meadows South Valleys.

At issue is the fact that no proper studies can be done on groundwater availability for the proposed 940 single-family dwellings.

My concern, my greatest concern is the 600-foot well and our valley water supplies.

No study can show that there is adequate water supplies for the size of this development, for example, based on an average of the lowest water years over the last 50 years.

Please do not let the Sierra Reflections development happen, one that will almost certainly negatively affect our water supplies during drought years for the existing Washa Valley residents and Pleasant Valley.

In addition, I have significant concerns regarding new vehicle trips, traffic congestion, public safety response times and capacity, and just the deterioration of the quality of life for existing residents.

In my opinion, the Pleasant and Washoe Valley areas are not the place for high density parcels.

And housing like Sierra Reflections.

I'm against this application.

Please help us protect the water supplies and quality of life in the South Valleys area.

Thanks for your consideration.

Thank you.

Christopher Wood, followed by Taylor Hodges.

Good morning, Commissioners.

Um, my name is Chris Wood.

Um, I am a uh longtime resident.

Well, since 2015, uh full time of uh Incline Village.

I am here speaking on the um appointment to the advisory planning commission uh of the TRPA.

Um I want to take this time to talk about um what that organization, the advisory planning commission does.

Uh the commission functions in an advisory capacity, obviously with that name, but more specifically, what it does is it collects technical information, planning information, and lay person a perspective.

And that's the role that you have here is to appoint somebody who will be a lay person uh from Washoe County.

Um just to give you another example, the advisory planning commission of what they do, another example.

They um recently um uh recommended to the TRPA that there be an environmental impact statement of the recent planning changes by the TRPA, and this is not insignificant at all.

Uh, the environmental impact statement is the highest and most difficult analysis that they do.

And the recommendation came from the APC through its work with a group called the Tahoe Living Working Group, which gathered information over two years, technical lay information and planning information, and said, hey, if you're gonna change the planning rules in the uh basin, then you need to do an a study like this.

Um, so that's that's what the APC is.

And I just wanted to make sure that we're all on that page.

Um, the function of the Washoe County lay representative, obviously, is to be non-technical.

It's it's not somebody who's supposed to come in with technical background necessarily, it's somebody who can represent the community, voice the community.

Uh, needless to say, um, Incline Village, and I don't know as much about Washoe County in general, but Incline Village doesn't always speak with the same voice.

So this is important role for the lay representative is to know the personalities, know the voices in the community and be able to express that, communicate it to the APC on issues that are before the APC.

Um that's pretty much what I wanted to talk to you about right now.

Um, thank you for this opportunity.

Bye.

Thank you.

Taylor Hodges, followed by Philip Gillenfarr.

Taylor Hodges, uh resident of the uh Steamboat Valleys for over 40 years.

Uh, regarding the uh Sierra Reflections, I'm an opposition to it.

Um, you know, living there my whole life.

We've had uh water warnings related to mining that's been going on in our area.

Mining is long term uh and it is directly related to mercury.

Um large water years, we've received warnings to not use our water to not use our wells because of the mines um that have gone up in the uh Virginia range, part of the Comstock load, and now we're talking about disturbing, you know, another site contaminated with mercury.

Um again, stress on the infrastructure that we have down there.

You know, when the wind with the high winds, we close the uh upper portion of 580, and that pushes all of that traffic down, which congests it further.

Uh the cyclists already experience death on that very specific stretch of highway between Pawnee Lane and East Lake Boulevard.

And then when you have those wind closures, you also um, you know, it pushes the traffic over to East Lake, which is also a very congested area with lots of families, um, people that are part of this master planned rural community where we like to raise our children.

Um the athletic fields are very stressed.

Um also the athletic fields are very stressed, and when people get in a rush, you know, we move to this community to uh have a certain way of life and be outdoors, and then you know, people get in a rush, and by the time you're dropping your kid off at the athletic field with no infrastructure with parking that is overwhelmed, someone drops their kid off, and by the time they're done dropping their child off, they're running your child over because they're in such a rush to go find parking to run back and see their family.

So there's a lot of things that goes into this, and the voters do oppose it.

Everybody opposes it, and that's what you guys are here to represent as the voters in your constituency, and overwhelming all of our resources and supplies and changing the feel of our community is not something that you guys should um condone.

And let's uphold the appeal.

And the reason it's being appealed is because people are against it, then there's gonna be another appeal, and people are still gonna be against it.

So I don't know how many times we have to hit it home, you know, to uh stop someone who doesn't live in our community from just thank you, Philip Gillinfarr, followed by Autumn Harry.

Morning, commissioners.

Um, thank you for the opportunity to speak.

I am uh an applicant for the uh Washoe County position, lay position on the APC.

My name is Phil Gillenfarr.

I've lived in the Tahoe Basin for I hate to admit over 60 years, um, and have operated an architectural office there uh for land planning and architecture in Incline Village since 1989.

Um, over the course of my career, I've worked extensively with TRPA, uh, worked extensively with Washoe County and other jurisdictions on a wide range of projects throughout the region, especially in the basin area.

Um I appreciate the critical role the TRP plays in protecting Lake Tahoe.

Um, I would welcome the opportunity to contribute my experience through the service on the advisory planning commission as the Washoe County representative.

My experience has given me practical experience uh and understanding of how TRPA policy works uh along with how they're implemented, um, how they affect the and protect Lake Tahoe and the communities that we live in.

Lake Tahoe is an extraordinary place, um plays an essential role in protecting it.

TRPA does.

Um, for five decades of living and working there, I would welcome the opportunity to serve Washoe County and the basin to help protect or to ensure the planning decisions continue to protect the lake, but also supporting our healthy communities.

The APC primarily primarily is a technical advisory, um, reviewing planning policies, development uh proposals, environmental issues in the Tahoe Basin, and make recommendations to the governing board and the governing body.

Um very limited amount of project specific uh review that they do.

Um, and there they don't make a final ruling.

My work has required extensive interaction with TRPA and the regulatory system, along with Washoe County's regulations and interpretating interpreting these regulations related to coverage, land capacity, um, scenic standards, environmental, uh fire, all these different uh forest health.

Um, I feel like my experience brings a lot of that uh to the table.

I've been involved in the community planning efforts for many years.

I was involved in the incline village and crystal Bay community plans.

Um, I want to say back in the uh 90s and 80s and 2000s, and and then again in the Tao area plan and uh incorporating the tall area plan.

I feel like I have an independent architectural and planning division.

I would be approaching this really as uh with that experience.

Um, my interest in in serving is simply to contribute my experience and long-time perspective to planning in the basin and how it affects our community as a whole.

Um, if appointed, I'd be honored to serve Washoe County and the basin and provide thoughtful balanced recommendation and support for environmental protection and and a strong community.

So I appreciate the time and the consideration.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Autumn Harry.

Hello.

Hello.

Hi everyone.

Uh, my name is Autumn Harry.

I'm a member of the Pyramid Lake Payute tribe and also an artist and muralist um who also lives on the Pyramid Lake Paiute tribe.

Um, I was really fortunate to work with Commissioner Garcia last year for a mural project in Verde.

And also I'm here to speak on agenda item 7E3 for the Sparks Mural Project uh for the library.

And yeah, I'm I wanted to thank you all because I know it was approved at the last meeting, but we have since switched fiscal sponsors.

And so on the agenda item today is to approve our new fiscal sponsor, which is Honor the Earth.

But I did want to show some images of the last mural that I worked with Commissioner Garcia on.

And how do I do that?

Just you can put it right down to your right.

Actually, another direction.

Sorry.

Oh, here, perfect.

Yeah.

Okay, there we go.

Um, so yeah, this is out in Verde, just below Cabela's, and it's along the river.

Um, this is part of the new one of the newer um parks that have been approved, Riverbend Park.

And so this is the image of Lahong Cutthroat Trout that are swimming upstream that don't have any barriers along the Truckee River.

Um, I tend to put a lot of trout and fish within my artwork.

I'm a fly fishing guide out at Pyramid Lake, and that's um one of my passions.

But this mural project was really focused on recognizing uh keystone species within our area.

Um, this is the second wall here with a coyote and her pup.

And um, you can see some of the native plants like Indian sage, uh, Indian paintbrush, sage, cattails.

Um, and it's meant to kind of draw your eyes to the river and the ecosystem around it.

Um this mirror was also the merging of the desert with the more alpine area.

And so on the third wall, we had a black bear and her cub, and she's catching a fish because the fish again didn't have any barriers, and um, she's able to eat and provide for her cubs.

And then we also have the lupin and the pine trees in this one.

Um, so a lot of my artwork does focus on the Truckee River watershed and how we can all do so much more when we're protecting the river and the lands, and um a lot of my work also has uh a big emphasis on um indigenous rights and indigenous connection to land.

And so um, yeah, just wanted to thank you and um ask for approval for us to continue working together for the Sparks Library.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That's everybody here in chambers, but we will switch now to Incline Village, and we have Helen Neff.

Hello.

Hello.

Hi, okay.

We lost our our um video here, but it sounds like we have audio.

Can you hear me okay?

We can hear you.

Thank you.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Thank you for this opportunity to address the board.

My name is Helen, and I live in Incline Village.

It is really encouraging to see nine applications for Washaw County's lay member appointment to the TRPA APC.

Because of the importance of this position, it's essential that the appointee be able to represent Washaw County and the local community without limitations or a potential conflicts based on the application.

Some candidates do not reside in Incline Village or Crystal Bay.

One does not appear to be registered to vote in in Washaw County and several disclosed potential conflicts of interest related to matters that may come before the APC, or they currently serve on other Washaw County boards.

After reviewing the applications, I respectfully express my support for the appointment of Harry Swenson as Washaw County's representative.

The APC plays an important role in evaluating complex environmental and planning issues affecting Lake Tahoe, including understanding and interpreting the science for the TRPA governing board.

Mr.

Swenson's extensive scientific background as well as his management and leadership experience during his career qualifies him for this role.

As a full-time resident of our community, he's directly familiar with our community most affected by the APC's work.

His involvement in local issues demonstrates a clear commitment to the well-being of Lake Tahoe and its residents, along with the balanced background needed to engage thoughtfully with the technical information that often informs TRPA's decision making.

Having a representative who lives and experiences the Lake Tahoe Basin community firsthand helps ensure that Washaw County's voice at the APC reflects the realities and needs of the residents most directly affected by its decisions.

There's one other point that I'd like to add.

When one of Harry's senior friends was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease, Harry made a point of picking him up every Thursday to take him to the IVGT conversation cafe and then to lunch, providing important social interaction.

We have limited senior services here.

And Harry went out of his way for one of his friends.

And this kindness and companion compassion for others is badly needed in today's society.

So I just wanted to add that.

Thank you for your consideration and for your service to the residents at Washow Cup.

Thank you.

There's nobody else signed in.

Thank you.

We'll go ahead and close public comment and move now to commissioners and county manager announcements.

Manager Thomas.

Thank you.

This is the announcements, reports, and updates to include boards and commission updates, requests for information or topics for future agendas.

If I may, I just have one thing.

I would love to welcome to the commission chambers, Mr.

Bennett and his class that is a middle school speech and debate class who are here to observe us today.

So welcome to all of you to Washoe County Commission Chambers.

And see their way.

Thank you for being here.

With that, I have no more announcements, Madam Chair.

Well, welcome.

I I think uh many of us um watched your video.

Thank you, Mr.

Bennett, for creating an incredible experience and creating a Guinness Book of World Records, right?

For the recitation of 460 students, if I remember that correctly, 480.

468.

Well, I had an eight and a six, but 468 students reciting in unison.

So congratulations on that, endeavor.

And welcome.

So I'll move, Commissioner Herman.

Do you have anything?

Thank you for the opportunity.

Um I was approached by a group of constituents recently, and uh they asked me if I would mention this at this time.

And that item would be um that they feel that some of the members of this board um don't quite understand the uh role of their job as a commissioner, that they feel like um they're being left out of some things because some of the commissioners feel that Reno is they're more allegiant to uh Reno city council members than they are to the to the county.

And so I promised I would give this message to you all.

And um, I think one couple more things that they said was um that we took our oath of office to take care of the people who elected them, basically, and that they felt that we could do a better job of that.

So I'm just relaying that message, and thank you very much.

Thank you.

Vice Chair Garcia.

Commissioner Hill.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Well, not afternoon, good morning, everyone.

I just have a few things.

We had the Verdeye TV district present to us, and I am wondering if there is an opportunity for the staff to look through the books that the Verde District have offered up to the county commission and see if this is something that the county should take on instead, and if it makes sense to have a separate Verde TV district, or if this is something that our staff through CSD potentially could manage, um, creating more transparency for the residents, which I've heard a lot of concerns um from my constituents on this, not knowing who these folks are who are running for office, not feeling like their meetings have been transparent, not feeling like the budgeting has been transparent.

We had a pretty um tough meeting with them, as you know from a few months ago.

And so I I just would like to see if um the board would have um an appetite to really dig deep um and have staff look at and see if this is something that could be uh consumed under Washoe County, if that would be appropriate, and that would be more than two staff hours.

So I think that would be a staff report coming before us to spend some time on that, and then I'm assuming there would be a report that would come out and we'd make some decisions from there.

And if it doesn't make sense, it doesn't make sense.

But I want to make sure that um I listen to my constituents and um and we look at best ways for government to run, and if that is a better way um to make sure that we're taking care of Verde, then um I'd like the staff to look into it.

Additionally, I had a very um disturbing report from a staff member who um at Washoe County who showed me a text message from a developer Mark Campbell, who is requesting an easement um from Washoe County, which has been postponed and put on several agendas.

Um and I'm not sure when the next time the seasement will be put on our agenda, but I wanted to be talk about what um I feel like uh the rules of decorum and ethics need to be.

This um developer essentially wrote that he'd like to see my vote as a quid pro quo um in order to get received campaign donations, which I would never do, which is fully unacceptable in Washoe County, fully unacceptable in Nevada, and uh does not follow um the ethics I follow, but certainly does not follow Nevada law.

So I've asked the DA's office to um have this gentleman um uh um looked into, have this um uh text message uh reported and investigated, and I certainly have never taken money from this man, never taken money from his development group, and that is not how we make decisions on this board.

We do not make decisions based on money.

We are not we cannot be bought, we cannot be paid for.

And I'm very angered by uh that um discussion that we could be because we are here to serve the public.

We are committed um in our roles to make this a better place.

And yes, we do ask for campaign donations when we run for office.

That is part of what we have decided in Nevada, certainly, and in America, we have to do to ensure that we get the word about out of who we are and what we believe in.

But we are not here to take money for decisions.

And I'm disgusted and I'm horrified by the assumption that that would happen.

And so again, I've asked the DA's office to look into this.

They are doing an investigation right now.

And um, I wanted to put this on the record because I think there's a misperception that uh elected officials just will take donations and will make decisions based on those donations.

And that is not how donations work in our state, and that is not how we work.

And I wanted to make sure that I let the public know about that and uh know about how uh disheartened I am, but very uh pleased that the DA's office is looking into investigation because we need to make these type of uh folks um examples if they think they can uh buy and pay for politicians.

It's unacceptable.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I I would just like to thank you for the disclosure.

Um it is under investigation, so there isn't any conclusion to be made, but um having said that and hearing this.

I would like to have Washoe County consider looking at as this investigation ensues, what funds have actually gone from Washoe County to any affiliated organizations that he has either contributed with or been involved in.

Um it's it's hard to hear that anyone would think that anyone could write a check and be bought.

It's absolutely not only illegal, it's unethical, immoral, and wrong.

So I would like to find out if Washoe County has expended any funds in that in that regard.

Thank you.

Commissioner Clark.

Thank you, madam chair.

And I salute my uh fellow commissioners for uh condemning this.

I don't agree with it at all.

I personally uh received a check from uh uh the cannabis allowance here in town and and refused to cash the check.

So uh anticipating a vote for for that.

So I know exactly what it feels like when somebody puts a check in your hand and expects maybe allegedly, maybe allegedly uh uh expected a vote.

But uh in that particular case, I still have the check framed at my house.

I didn't cash it, and I wouldn't cash it.

And that's just uh uh something to remind me not to accept funds for for any uh any campaign contributions for any vote.

So I don't do it either, and uh and I salute you for condemning that.

Uh but let's move forward.

There's a 900-pound gorilla in this room this morning, and it's uh been all over the news last night, yesterday.

My morning yesterday started about nine o'clock.

I get a call from the the from the chair of this body and said, I've got to call you and tell you that I got a call from the mayor, and I can't tell you what the call's about.

I can't tell you what's taking place.

So I'm thinking, well, why did you even call me?

I I got a call to to be told that I can't tell you what the call's about.

That's that's how it started, you know.

And uh, and uh this sounds to me like we've got just another example of uh Bohica.

If you get a chance, Google the word Bohica, B-O-H-I-C-A.

Those that know, and the people that don't should Google that and and understand what I'm gonna talk about next.

We got a situation that's taking place in the county, and there's zero transparency.

I still don't know.

I got a call, I called the sheriff, I called other people that I know, nobody seems to know anything.

It's just a never-ending story.

This is like Reno 911 live today.

This we don't need to make up a parody of the the town.

We just have to watch what takes place here on a regular basis.

Um the mayor of Reno uh asked uh asked the the chair to call us and tell us that we needed to hear that something would be told to us at at a noon press conference.

Well, we heard something, but we were didn't really hear what's taking place.

Uh no answer.

Uh, you know, was the chief doing such a great job that they pumped the brakes and and put her on administrative leave because things were going so well there?

Probably not.

Probably something was going wrong there that uh that uh is taking place, but but the citizens and the taxpayers don't get to know about it.

I mean, we don't need the intimate details of what's taking place, but we certainly should have got a a better explanation of what's what's taking place.

And now it looks like the duly elected sheriff of our county is going to be uh uh commandeered to run uh the the Reno police department, at least that's what I'm telling hearing.

And again, these are all just comments I'm making based on less than transparency that I that I'm seeing.

So if we had a better understanding, I might not need to talk about it about it here today.

But uh, you know, uh you know, many times the taxpayers don't get in when informed about this.

Did the taxpayers elect the sheriff, the county, the the non-in unincorporated part of the the county voted on the sheriff?

Did the f did the taxpayers understand that the sheriff was gonna have a side hustle, that the sheriff was gonna have another job to do?

We elected him to be our sheriff, not the sheriff for whoever needed remedial attention around here.

You know, there's lots and lots of folks that are retired law enforcement.

There's lots and lots of folks that maybe could have been uh brought in as an interim police chief.

And and and I have great respect for the Reno Police Department.

This is an absolute disrespect to all the folks, men and women sworn officers there.

There isn't a single person in that organization that could rise to leadership.

Why didn't they promote from within as a temporary basis?

You know, why why does the county have to bail out the city?

That's what it looks like to me.

Just another example of missteps over at the city of Reno, and to Commissioner Herman's point.

Uh, you know, uh questioning some allegiance of folks on here on this dais.

We've got a couple of folks here that actually live in the city limits.

And you know how how is the county supposed to, how is the county taxpayers supposed to bail out, bail out the uh the city of Reno's police department?

You know, they offer to pay, I understand that.

Money's money's not the object.

The object is time.

We all have 24 hours in the day, not 48 hours in the day.

How does it how does the f uh the the uh sheriff get extra time?

How does his chief deputy get extra time?

What about the mentoring and the training and the the caring that the Reno police force needs?

And the same with the sheriff.

They need their own leadership, not a borrowed leadership.

This is like if your neighbor's car breaks, you've got to give him your car so he can get around and you can't use your car.

It's the same same kind of an analogy.

It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

I've got a prepared statement.

I was just some uh things off the cuff, but you know, and we've got to look at we've got to go upstream and look at the city of Reno.

Look at look at the city of Reno.

We've got a mayor there that's been working uh for 12 for four almost almost 14 years, over 12 years.

The term limit is 12 years, and she's uh still at the job, the the leadership.

Then we then we look at at least three of these uh city council people were appointed.

That's a good the voters never had a chance to vote on these people.

They got appointed by their pals that were already uh inside the the city.

So the voters were disenfranchised at least three different times.

They didn't get a chance to vote on who's making these decisions.

And then the the police chief is getting blamed.

Who was supervising the police chief in the city of Reno?

Why wasn't the City of Reno supervising their own police chief?

Why does the county have to come in and it's like uh we've got a break on aisle three, we need some help cleaning things up on aisle three.

This is this is a breakdown in management over there at the City of Reno, and yet again they always look at the county to come in and save them, right in on the white horse.

We're the white knight here.

It's ridiculous.

Lack of transparency.

People don't understand what's taking place.

This isn't things that they voted for, they get it jammed down them, and again, look up the word Bohica if you get a chance.

My uh just off the cuff.

I've got some comments that I want to that I've written down.

You know, as a district two uh commissioner for Washoe County, I'd like to understand why I and potentially other members of the commission were not consulted by Darren Balam regarding the reported agreement in which Washoe County Sheriff's Office will assume leadership roles at the Reno Police Department during an investigation involving Nevada Department of Public Safety.

According to the reports, the City of Reno will be paying the sheriff to take over key leadership functions during the investigation.

The arrangement raises a straightforward question.

Since Washoe County Commission ultimately approves and oversees the sheriff's office budget, shouldn't county leadership have been consulted before entering in such an agreement.

This is uh not about second guessing uh the investigation itself.

Transparency and cooperation between the agencies are important, especially when serious matters are involved.

But when county resources, personnel, leadership are being committed to assist another jurisdiction, commissioners have a responsibility to ensure those commitments do not impact the services we provide to our constituents across Washoe County.

The issue becomes even more complicated in light of the recent public commentary from Reno uh Councilmember Devin Reese in response to reporting by by our town Reno, the journalist Nico Columbant.

Reese wrote on social media that we should be careful not to let the allegations drive the headlines or shape the narrative before the facts are known.

While caution is always appropriate during an ongoing investigation, public officials should also recognize that transparency, legitimate questions from the press, and the public are part of the healthy civic process.

What concerns me most is whether this agreement effectively places the burden of Reno's internal situation on county resources.

Washoe County residents deserve assurances that their sheriff's deputy's leadership and uh operational capacity will not be diverted in ways that uh reduce or hamper the services that the community we serve.

For that reason, I'd like the sheriff to appear before the commission and provide clear answers.

Specifically, I want assurances that the arrangement will not diminish public safety coverage or investigative investigative capacity for residents of Washoe County.

This situation also recalls earlier reporting by Pecan Press regarding Chief Nance and Sparks Chief Chris Crawforth in early 2023.

In hindsight, some of those developments may provide additional context for why certain leadership decisions were made at the time, including why Chief Crawford ultimately declined the Reno police chief position and and uh Nance was offered the position.

At the end of the day, this is not about politics or personality.

It's about accountability and ensuring that uh the people uh uh that transparency uh for the people of Washoe County, they they receive public safety than they expect and deserve.

They receive the uh public safety that they expect and deserve.

So that's those are my comments.

We've got we've got ongoing problems here on a regular basis.

I had a meeting with the uh county uh manager yesterday and said I'm totally desensitized.

There isn't a thing that can happen around here that would shock me.

Not one thing between uh pistol whipping down on 4th Street and uh shooting of uh homeless people on bridges and on and on and on and on and on.

When can we get this sorted out?

We've got our own problems here at the county.

We don't need to be babysitting in the other municipalities.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um just for clarification, um, as a courtesy for the chair, I called all commissioners and using the word can't was really that I had no idea.

It's an investigation that's ongoing, and uh there wasn't any intent to uh uh hide anything from my perspective.

I was just feeling a responsibility to ensure that all the commissioners knew there was going to be a press conference that the city of Reno, the mayor called me.

I um extended that um courtesy professionally to let everyone know, meaning fellow commissioners that it was going to take place at noon yesterday, which it did.

Other than that, I have no idea.

So can't is a word, and if I did use it, I I apologize.

It was not to infer that I wasn't willing to share.

I had nothing to share.

It is under the city of Reno, as you know, and many of you may be aware that there was a press conference that was held, and the city of Reno, you know, conducted that under their purview, not Washoe County.

So um I did want to just clarify that.

And Manager Thomas, would you like to add anything?

One moment.

I've got some.

May I may I thank you?

Um thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Commissioner Clark.

I know yesterday was was challenging.

I I certainly don't want to speak for the sheriff.

However, um, as a regional partner, Washoe County frequently works uh cross jurisdictional boundaries.

Washoe County represents the entire county, um, and the sheriff is um essentially a resident of the county uh in terms of us assisting with with issues.

I know you were aware of our work on Fourth Street with the Reno Police Department.

But um, and again, I don't want to speak for the sheriff, but I do I do look to him to determine the effective allocation of his resources and know that there was some discussion about that.

Um, so I certainly know that I, as your manager, would never overcommit resources.

Um, we will have the interlocal agreement come before this board next week.

We are getting that on the agenda.

The sheriff will be here um to talk to you as a board about the things that you've brought up, Commissioner.

Um, so I just wanted to get that um um on the record.

I know that that agreement has been in the works with the city, with the uh district attorney's office.

It's an internal HR matter, so again, the information that we have is limited, other than the fact that uh when we're called to serve, we typically do cross those jurisdictional boundaries and would hope for the same in the event that that ever happens here, which of course we will do everything we can to prevent that scenario.

But thanks for your comments.

Thank you, Commissioner Clark.

And and I want to apologize if you thought that I was accusing you of not sharing any information.

Couldn't nothing could be further than the truth.

I I realized that you're that you were in the dark as well, and and I believe that in my heart of hearts that you didn't know why why you were placing the call.

But but at the end of the day, we don't know what's going on, and our sheriff apparently has already uh got an agreement that we have that we're gonna sign after the fact.

And to your point, uh Manager Thomas.

Yeah, we're all we're all the county, and we're here to help other municipalities.

I get that.

But at the end of the day, don't put the deal together and then bring it to us next week to vote on it, okay?

That's the cart before the horse.

Give us the details.

Maybe we won't approve it.

We don't know what the hell we're doing here.

What did Pelosi say?

Just sign the just vote on it and uh and read it later, okay?

Well, I'm not I'm not in for that.

I'm a county person.

I don't live in Reno.

I don't support a lot of the things they do.

I don't get a vote on it.

Uh uh, you know, I'm not a fan of what they do at the city of Reno.

I want that on the record.

Okay.

So we'll bail them out, uh probably, maybe, who knows?

I probably, maybe, who knows?

But we don't know what the terms of the deal are.

I understand that the governor's involved in this.

Uh everybody uh according to what I read or see.

The governor's involved, other people are involved in this.

Except for those of us that are gonna vote on this interlocutory agreement.

How does that happen?

You know, this is just one more example of uh uh disenfranchisement, okay.

Nobody knows what the hell they're gonna do, but the sheriff's already with the mayor, apparently.

Um I don't know if you were involved.

It sounds like you weren't, but this reminds me of when Manager Brown used to be here when you just uh put tails together and uh vote on them later.

I'm not good with that.

That isn't the way uh this this uh this is not the way America is set up.

We'll we'll vote on it, we'll agree to it, and then we'll vote on it a week later.

How does that happen?

How does that happen?

Thank you.

Thank you for your apology as well.

I never meant it was you.

I meant I meant the whole thing stinks, okay.

Thank you.

Anyone else have any comments or anything they'd like to add?

And thank you for students for coming.

Thank you all.

Thank you.

Hope the kids got a good turnout and got a good good air full today, huh?

Thank you.

Come on down.

All right.

Well, we are going at least it's a memorable experience.

I thought uh we're gonna go ahead and close item number four.

Um we're gonna move to presentations, and I just would like to share that on the agenda is a presentation by Brenda Scleri, who's the director of the Nevada Department of Tourism and Cultural Affairs.

That is been rescheduled to April 14th.

So I do apologize if anyone was eagerly awaiting for that presentation, but you'll see it on April 14th.

We'll now move to uh item 5A2, county manager.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We have a presentation and an update on the fiscal year 26 second quarter status report for the Washoe County Regional Detention Facility.

This will include security of the jail, conditions of confinement, staffing and medical care medical care of inmates housed at the Wash County Sheriff's Office.

And we will welcome our sheriff's uh staff to give us an overview.

Thank you, Mr.

Welcome.

Good morning, Captain John Stewart with the Wash County Sheriff's Office.

Thank you for what you do.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Good morning, commissioners, madam chair, manager.

Um I have this player I'll say here.

So we got the second quarter stats for you.

Like I'd said before, I like to go I give you all the stats, but I like to dive in deep on a few of them just to explain so you guys have better understanding of what's going on there and what these stats mean.

Um medical refusals, we've had 42.

And what that would mean is if um one of our sister agencies brings in an M8 and our medical team determines that they have a health condition, whether their blood pressure is too high, their blood alcohol concentration, or their BAC is too high, or maybe they have an infection of some sort that is higher than the level of care that we can give at the detention facility.

Um they will they will refuse them and refer them out to the hospital, and it kind of defers a liability on the county and on the taxpayer, uh depending on who the rest arresting agency is.

Um that it's more of a triage.

Uh we definitely have emergency medical care when needed.

Um, but we are a pretty low-level care when it comes to emergency medicine.

So when you see those refusals, that's what we're talking about.

The grievances, we're talking about some medical grievances that they handle and we oversee on some some of the appeals portions of that, and the ER referrals.

Nothing really jumps out at me as far as being out of the ordinary, and I like to point those out to you when I see them.

As far as the PRIA designation, um, we had some issue working with our medical contractor on getting those numbers for those months.

Um, but in our next quarterly, I'll definitely have those.

Um, we got some suicide watches.

You see, they're pretty high in October.

November, they dropped a little bit to 69, and then December, even more to 53.

Um, mental health medications, uh, our average daily population over last year is about 1170 inmates.

And so for approximately 800 of them uh to take uh mental health medications that gives you a good idea of the population that we deal with within the within the detention facility.

Some more stats over the months uh dental visits or um medically assisted treatment.

Um that would be anything from Suboxin to uh can't remember what the other uh medication they use, but sometimes when people are detoxing off of um drugs or something or substance, uh that's what we're talking about with the MAP program.

And that's a pretty good program trying to prevent when they go back out to the community community and get them into treatment and uh reduce that recidivism.

So our hospital days, uh, that's when we send somebody out to the hospital.

Uh a huge uptick in December.

Um get with our medical staff and kind of see what what was going on there.

Sometimes we'll have very chronically ill uh inmates within our custody, whether that be if they're older or they have an infection and they might be in the hospital for months at a time.

And so sometimes we'll see spikes in those numbers.

Uh we worked really well with the courts and with our medical staff to mitigate as much as we can uh for the taxpayer dollar.

If we can work with the courts, depending on the charges of the inmate uh to see if they can um talk with the judges, talk with the uh district attorney to see if we can mitigate some of that.

We we were always working very hard to do that.

Um so our total average daily population uh for the second quarter was 1158 again.

Last year, our average was 1170.

Oftentimes we'll see an uptick towards springtime and summertime.

Uh winter time we see it go down just a little bit, but that just gives you an idea.

Our average length of stay or ALS is what we call it, was about 16.3, the average length of stay for the inmates within our facility.

And we see from quarter two of last year, it dropped from 1664 to 16.3.

Total bookings and total releases for the second quarter, 3,806 bookings with 3,786 releases.

When we talk about these fights, uh, we see that the inmate versus inmate 21 uh for the quarter, it's up from 15.

Within the second quarter, we often see a little bit of an uptick, and sometimes that could be with the holidays and inmates.

Obviously, there's a lot of motion going on.

We try to counteract that with getting them out of the out of their cells more often, and also with the tablets and stuff that we have and the devices that we have, whether they're playing music, video, or doing video visits with their families.

We try and encourage as much as that as we can because we know that that brings that stress level down, so we have less less fights.

But this is this is typical for the second quarter.

Um inmates versus staff, 10.

That was up from six.

Fights averted, 65 fights were averted.

That was up from 63 from the first quarter.

Suicide watch placements, that's 219.

So that would be any time somebody says that they're gonna harm their harm themselves, or they actively try to harm themselves, and we determined that they need to go on a suicide watch.

Suicide interventions, that specifically means that they were attempting some sort of harm to themselves, whether that was using a uh a sheet or using an improvised weapon to try and harm themselves.

Uh that's what that number is, just so we're all aware.

And this is we talked about this a little bit in length, the inmate assistant program and the days that we save versus the dollar per day uh that we calculate.

And for the second quarter, we've determined that we've saved four 4,455 days out of jail, which equates out to just under a million dollars at 911,250.

I think that concludes the presentation.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any questions?

Commissioner Clark.

Do you have any questions?

I just have a comment.

I I've always very supportive of the sheriff's department.

Uh I've been to the jail on a numerous tours.

I think you're doing a fantastic job there.

Uh very clean, uh, very respectful.

The food there is excellent.

And uh I think you're doing a great job.

And we enjoy these uh reports.

And my comments about what else has taken place has no reflection whatsoever on the rank and file or the uh other management of the sheriff's department.

You guys are just doing your job.

You know, you have you do you have to go along with the flow, whatever's taking place?

But the jail is uh really a good uh good place, clean, orderly, professional.

I I watch the uh deputies interact with uh with the inmates there, and it's uh everything was always respectful.

So nothing but good things to say about your department.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Commissioner Hill.

I I don't have any questions.

Well, I do actually.

When is the next graduation for getting out, getting ahead and while getting out?

Do you know?

Uh I I can get back to you.

Okay.

We're still working with TMCC on that program, correct?

Yes, ma'am.

Okay.

Just wanted to make sure.

And um, and are we having any issues with folks being able to enroll or is it still going well?

I think it's still going well.

Okay.

Yeah, for my understanding, and just to give you guys a little extra piece, we're also doing an OSHA program as well to try to get people certified with OSHA through one of those programs.

That's when they get out, they have some certification.

Yeah, some technical skills.

And then on the uh transportation piece, I know we've been working closely uh to see how we can support inmates who are released in the middle of the night, making sure they have proper transportation.

Obviously in North Virginia, they're kind of in the middle of nowhere.

Have has the RTC partnership um been able to be strengthened since we've been meeting on that.

Do you know if um I haven't heard any negative things, which is always a plus, but I just wanted to make sure that you have the resources you need from RTC.

We were helping you with bands that were picking folks up, and there was a straight line to our dispatch, but I just wanted to make sure that is that's still happening, or are there any is there anything I need to know on that piece?

Yes, ma'am.

I I believe it's still happening.

We still see the RTC buses come up to the front instead of having the inmates go down towards a bonanza where the where the other bus stop was through.

Great, great.

So folks are getting the transportation that they need, and okay, just you know, stay in touch, make make sure that we know if there's any issues that uh you know we need to look into as well.

So thank you for your work.

Welcome, thank you.

Commissioner Herman.

I just wanted to thank you very much for doing the work you do because I couldn't do I couldn't even begin to do what you do.

All the dangerous things that you guys had to handle.

It's just amazing.

And I'm so grateful for you all.

Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

We're happy to do it.

Jake Garcia.

Thank you, Chair Andreola.

Um, I appreciate the update.

I know these are these are statutorily required, I believe, quarterly updates, and we're here in our role to make sure that the roof is still standing up, that you have the infrastructure, the the safety of our inmates is is paramount, and that you have everything you need to do um in terms of operations.

And so I'm curious about the mental health population.

Um you mentioned, and maybe I missed this as you were talking, but the suicide watch placements uh was at 219 this quarter.

Um is that pretty much where it's usually around, or have we seen an increase or a spike?

I'd have to go back and and and check the last quarter.

Okay.

Um but as far as the placements and just people either stating that they want to harm themselves or emitting behavior that we believe they're trying to harm themselves without them stating it.

Um it could be it could be due to intoxication when they're coming in.

It could be due to you know, they do have mental health issues outside of intoxication.

That number doesn't jump out at me over a three-month period because we get often uh multiple a day.

Yeah.

So that's uh I would say that that number doesn't surprise me with the population that we're dealing with.

And again, we house about 1,170 inmates uh on a daily daily basis.

Great.

Thanks for the clarification.

As you know, this body is very supportive of all the mental health efforts happening throughout the region.

Your uh facility is no different.

And so if you do see trends changing, please let us know at the quarterly reports.

I didn't see the quarter over quarter, year over year comparison there.

So I was just curious.

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Clark.

Thank you, madam chair.

Uh when you brought up OSHA, uh OSHA training, uh, could you tell us a little bit about that?

What does that involve?

Um the we we have a programs director, and it's and it's fairly new, uh, but from my understanding, they have classes where our inmates will be certified with their OSHA certificates for when they leave the facility, then they have an opportunity for other jobs when they get out there.

And the idea is to obviously help them out, but also reduce the recidivism.

So if they get out there and they get out on their feet and they have money coming in, maybe they're not turning into some turning to some old ways where they were looking for fast money and coming back in the door.

So so thank you for that clarification.

Uh the next is going to be a suggestion.

Uh do we have do you have anyone at liaison with the trade unions in this this area in this county?

Uh I know that the all the trade unions are looking for apprentices.

Uh there's good pay there.

The chamber of commerce has got thousands of of she doesn't call them jobs, she calls them careers.

So folks that get that certificate might want to check in with the Chamber of Commerce, or maybe somebody from your office could have a liaison relationship with the Chamber of Commerce and the trade unions, the electricians, the plumbers, uh the sheet metal workers, all of these unions are looking for for folks, and and these are good, uh, you know, uh good jobs and pays well.

So if they're gonna get the OSHA training, the next step is maybe get them in some type of uh apprenticeship program and at least introduce them to that.

So if you're your department could maybe look into doing that if you aren't already, that would be very helpful.

Thank you.

Yes, sir.

We'll speak with the programs director about that.

I think it's a good idea.

Thanks.

Commissioner Hill.

Thank you.

Uh I asked at the beginning of the year if we could have an analysis of the breakdown between the reimbursement we receive with ICE detainees and what the sheriff's department is spending when we detain um ICE detainees.

So if we could have that information by our next meeting, which is on Tuesday, that would be really great.

Yes, ma'am.

Uh I have a little bit of cardinal knowledge because I did the IGA, the intergovernmental agreement.

Is that what you would be looking for?

Is the intergovernmental agreement with the Marshalls because it falls under technically the Marshalls, and that's how it's depicted on where that price point is.

Is that is that what you're doing?

So, yes, the agreement we have with them, and then what were the delta, what we're actually spending.

Um, we're seeing in communities actually in Nevada and Henderson, where they're exceeding their um compensation from the federal government on that what they're spending on these detainees.

I think the public has a right to know what that looks like.

So hopefully we can um get that number.

I'll get that forward.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Any other comments?

Well, there's an OSHA 10 and OSHA 30, and I'm pretty familiar with those, and so it's a great, that's a great segue into uh looking at construction jobs.

So I think it's a great suggestion.

But I do want to share with you that someone was in my office, nothing to do with this per se, other than sharing how impressed they were with the jail-based mental health program that you have and how um other counties may be uh using the model and the success that you all have put into place and and uh having that replicated.

So I thought I'd share that.

Thank you, ma'am.

So thank you for all your hard work.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

All right.

We'll move now to item five A3.

Manager Thomas.

Thank you.

We are joined today for a presentation by Chief Judge Egan Walker, who's going to talk to us a little bit about competency court and the program performance and the return on the investment.

Well, it's thrilling.

I know that Judge Walker is excited to be here, and we're excited to have you.

And uh I've been uh anxiously awaiting.

I've been asking for this, along with lots of other wisdom that you carry, but certainly appreciate you sharing all of this with you.

Yeah, Madam Chair, it's a privilege, madam vice chair and commissioners.

Thank you for having me.

My name's Egan Walker.

I serve as a district judge here in the second judicial district.

Uh, a little over two years ago, um, I challenged all of you to lean in with me for what's called the sequential intercept model.

And I said, give me two years.

You'll remember that.

I remember that.

I asked you for an FTE through our budget, who's here with me today, the case manager for competency court.

I'm gonna tell you what that FTE got you through the work of an awful lot of dedicated individuals.

I did not know that I'd follow Captain Stewart, but he left you with the concept of jail bed days saved.

I'm gonna build on that a lot.

So in the three years, two and a half years, really, that competency court has been alive.

We've diverted 150 people out of what is otherwise a very dysfunctional pipeline.

You may recall that if people are not competent to answer allegations against them, they're put into the pipeline into the state forensic system, which has been chronically underfunded and under-resourced for decades.

We got 150 people out of that pipeline.

Um, we believe we've saved you all through bed days at the jail and at Lake's Crossing, 9.6 million dollars.

That is a gross understatement of how much money has been saved.

It isn't a check into the county coffers, unfortunately.

You don't get that extra budget authority, save and accept that you all will be very aware that I as a district judge sanctioned the state of Nevada multiple times in the last 12 to 18 months.

And there were checks delivered to the county general fund which exceed a million dollars in fines imposed by me against the state of Nevada for underfunding the competency restoration system.

We return 196 people to competency, and evaluations are happening 80% faster now than they were previously.

So what does that mean?

I'm going to come to you to talk a lot about the sequential intercept model in the coming months, but really this lives, and what Catherine Stewart tells you about lives in intercepts zero through four of the sequential nursery cell model.

What happens before people hit interaction with a police officer, what happens after they're arrested, what happens when they go to court, what happens when they're disposed of in court, and then what happens when they leave court.

And really, um, intercept three is where I live and work as a district judge, but I'm trying to push all of these concepts across intercepts.

And I'll return to the that uh to that topic with all of you in further presentations.

Here's where we were when we started.

In general, before we started competency court, it took 68 days to get from a court order for evaluations to an evaluation or two completed evaluations.

Two months and eight days of human beings' lives just to get a doctor or a trained psychologist to evaluate them to see if they're competent to answer the allegations.

That's an abomination.

Those are dead days.

Those are dead days to the human beings involved, dead days to the taxpayers who pay for those days.

After we got evaluations, finding people not competent and needing to go into the forensic pipeline system, it took 141 days to get people to Lakes Crossing.

141 days.

So you can see already that if people were accused of a gross misdemeanor, for which my jurisdiction over them is 364 days in the Washoe County jail, they've spent more days in jail before they've even entered a plea or been found guilty of any charge than they would get if I gave them the max sentence.

You know, a 364 day sentence is usually about 180 days in jail.

And the cost for that, for all of that dead time is $500 a day to your budget and to the taxpayers of the county.

What was more troubling to me than the dollars were the human tools.

So you saw that 65 to 70% of the people who reside in the Washop County jail take psychotropic medications.

That should give you all pause.

We are using the jail as a mental health treatment facility, and that happens in this county and every county in the nation.

And so people with serious mental illness languish in jail.

All of the studies, every court that's ever looked at it, every county commission that's ever looked at it, any entity that's ever looked at it, say jail is not treatment.

People get worse, their mental health gets worse, their serious mental health gets worse in jail.

And we were housing people in jail to no good end.

Now, we have a remarkably good sheriff who is very uh forward-leaning and smart on justice.

Those of you who I've had the privilege of going to Miami with no, my mantra is let's be smart on justice.

Let's do the things that build us a healthier, safer community.

And so we had this broken system in which people just basically were lost indefinitely for months on end, sometimes more than a year.

And there was no way to get people out.

Why you might say, should we get people out?

A significant number of people are so sick, they're never gonna be found competent to answer criminal charges.

What happens is they get arrested, they go to jail, they spend months in jail to be found not competent to have the charges dismissed.

They get out at midnight on a Saturday with no bus ride to their home, no medications, and they get arrested within 48 hours.

And we start the whole process all over again.

All of those people need to be out of the system.

We had no way to do that previously.

It was this wash, rinse, repeat over and over and over again to the tune of millions and millions and millions of dollars.

So we said, what are our goals?

We want to standardize the process in a fiscally responsible manner.

We're gonna provide timely access to competency restoration and mental health rehab services as appropriate, advance community safety and recidivism, develop partnerships with stakeholders to assist in identifying treatment for individuals who need treatment, and promote transparency, efficiency, and improved communication.

So there's some big numbers up here, and this isn't just hyperbole, folks.

As I said, these aren't numbers that I put into your general fund account, but they are numbers I saved you.

So when the assistant district attorney, Zach Young, and others have presented to you in the past, the first number we gave you was 2.9 million dollars in savings.

The way we calculated that was to say the people who we diverted out of the competency pipeline into some alternative for treatment in the community, got a total of 5,800 days of community-based service out of jail.

So $500 a day times $5,800 days is $2.9 million.

That's the first number we brought you.

That number is underreported by orders of magnitude.

Should be about four times higher.

Because the next number you see, $6.78 million, is calculated in this way.

We know that there were 64 people served in 2025, calendar year 2025 that we diverted out of competency court.

It would take them on average 96 days to get from the jail to lakes, and then another 90 days at lakes.

So if you multiply 64 people by 96 days by 500 a day, and do that again for lakes, you get the total number of 6.7 million dollars.

But here's the kicker to that.

None of this includes the hospitalization costs, right?

What do I mean by that?

So those people who get out at midnight on Saturday without meds, when they get arrested, inevitably Monday or Tuesday morning, you just heard they get refused at the jail because their mental health needs are too high.

Where do they go?

The ER.

And that's money spent.

That's not included in this figure.

And once they're cleared at the ER, assuming they get cleared at the ER because they get psychotropic medications at the ER and they come to the jail, none of that's accounted for in these figures.

So this is saving millions of dollars, and that is not hyperbole.

And I'll have been having to sit down and do the math in detail with anybody who has any questions.

But what does it look like for a healthier safer community?

So, Commissioner Andreola, you've asked me repeatedly, what do you need?

And every time I say I need beds.

So, what is giving people a bed look like?

So we have 24 people through NAMS program called supportive housing.

Supportive housing isn't, I don't mean in any way to minimize what NAMS does, but it's buying somebody a hotel room at the Terry Inn.

It's not a big deal, right?

It's not that much.

But if we buy 24 people a hotel room, for example, at the Terry Inn, the average annual cost per person is $34,000, $35,000 to house somebody.

That saves $3.5 million because it gets them out of the system, right?

It gets them out of this broken competency restoration system.

So spending money actually does save money in circumstances, but forget about that.

Let's talk about what that looks like to you, me, your families, and mine who aren't getting battered by people with mental health issues, who aren't getting their property destroyed by people with mental health issues, who aren't getting scared by people indecently exposing themselves because they have mental health issues.

If you look at the 24 people in this NAMS subset who've been housed, we reduced their arrest rate by 93%.

On average, they're getting arrested twice a year outside of this program.

When they're in this program, they're getting arrested one-tenth of a time per year, or 12% per year.

That is remarkable.

You will not see data like this anywhere else in the criminal justice system, I suggest to you.

We reduce their psychiatric hospitalizations.

So again, that's state dollars, not county dollars.

Psychiatric hospitalizations happen at Deaney Townsend Hospital, but every community pays for those dollars.

I mean, the state, the tax dollars I pay and you pay still still go to the state.

And reducing those psychiatric hospitalizations, number one is the right thing to do for people, but it also saves a remarkable amount of money.

Here's a fascinating statistic, though.

You give them a house of no services, you reduce their arrest rate by 40%.

Put them in our competency court, and you reduce it stunningly.

So we can pay $95 a day for uh NAMS housing, or we can pay $500 a day for jail housing.

It's really your choice.

It's really our choice as a community.

This is what before and after looks like.

So $141 days to get to Lakes Crossing in 2022, when I started this.

Some of us, Commissioner Clark, Commissioner Garcia went to Miami Dade, as did many of the stakeholders on two different trips from Washoe County.

That's why I went to Miami Dade is I had to figure out why is it taking so long to get people.

What's happening now at that program at the jail is people get immediately admitted.

I sign an order saying they need for forensic restoration, they go that day.

Again, at $500 a day.

And restoration for those people who qualify for the program in the jail, not all people qualify for the program in the jail, but for those who do, restoration begins immediately.

I can't thank enough some really heroic people.

I would be remiss not to thank the district attorney.

So Zach Young's the number two in the DA's office.

It's rare as a judge that I get FaceTime with the number two in the DA's office.

And Zach leaned in hard to this system.

And until this last year, when one of his chiefs took over, Zach was the DA at competency courts.

So the number two in the DA's office.

The reason all those cases get diverted is because the DA exercises his or her discretion discretion to get people out of the pipeline.

So this does not happen without the district attorney.

One chief, um, you know, if I could clone Jennifer Rains, um, I would.

If I could create multiple human beings in the quality of her, I would.

I don't know how to describe what she gives to this system.

The APD's office, uh, the housing and homeless services, the public guardian's office.

You have so many jewels in the crown of the county that I would sing the praises to all of you about the public guardian, human services.

They go on and on.

Because you'll notice other than an FTE through the court's budget, an independent branch of government, albeit you gave me no money for this.

The way this happened was people.

That's what we have is we have people.

Both police departments through CIT training, the justices courts.

I tell you an interesting story.

There was a husband and wife up in Incline Village.

We've heard several people talk from Incline Village, who are caught in a terribly tragic uh cycle of domestic violence at the same time that the husband is suffering from Alzheimer's type dementia.

And he was getting arrested and arrested and arrested and arrested and arrested because he didn't know where to go other than his home where his wife lived, where he had a TPO, and he couldn't get any services that would succeed in breaking this cycle of arrest that he was not really competent to answer anyway.

And so within the county, the Justice of the Peace, Judge Manjarina, reached out to the team and the DA and the alternate public defender, they brought the case to competency court.

And in one hearing, I was able to, through the good graces of his wife, confirm she could move out of the house.

He could move into the house, which is the only place he knew.

They had the means to do it.

And what do you know?

He hasn't been arrested since.

And he'd been arrested six times in the six months prior to that.

So it's magic what happens with collaboration.

So there you have it.

You asked for my report, Commissioner Andy Rio.

I thank you very much for the time to come back to you with it.

I welcome any questions.

Thank you, Judge Walker.

And I have repetitively asked what you need.

And do you still need 50 beds?

The last time I asked, you said if I had 50 more beds.

So I'm asking.

So two things are happening in the county.

One has already happened and one is about to happen.

The city is opening highway 40 across from the CARES campus.

Yeah.

And the CARES campus opened permanent supportive housing within the CARES campus.

And really what I need is permanent supportive housing, not just supportive housing, i.e., we pay pay for a room at uh, you know, the Terry Inn.

I need that magic of wraparound services to make sure that people get their mental health treatment, that they take their medications, that they are clean and sober, that they get uh substance abuse treatment if they have substance abuse addiction issue, et cetera.

So I'll take five beds if you give me.

Um 50 beds would change this.

Um 50 beds would change this.

Look what has happened.

50 beds would change this community.

I appreciate it.

Um, I'll just also just mention that if um any of the commissioners have not uh attended competency court with Judge Walker, I would encourage you to do so.

It was very, very conducive in terms of alignment of exactly what you're talking about.

And I also think it's important to share that the sequential intercept model is actually bigger than just the one um area that that you're pointing out that it also encompasses the CARES campus and our place and really collectively, the Hope team, and you've you lifted you've listed several of them there, but it really is a community effort that actually has to be embraced regionally to be effective, in my opinion.

But um, your um invitation to the competency court, I would encourage someone else, if you haven't done so, to please attend it really.

Thank you, and thanks to the full-time person that um has a name, not an FTE.

Okay, I I don't want to call her FTE.

So thank you, Ms.

Hutchins, um, as well.

It's uh amazing when you have a model that you can work with with almost nothing, it sounds like imagine if we gave you something.

So I think it's something to think about.

Well, this beautiful desert we live in is beautiful.

It's a desert of resources.

But what we've got is people.

You know, in Nevada, I'm fond of saying Nevada's small enough you can actually get you know what done.

Yep.

Because everybody knows everybody.

That's right.

And because everybody knows any everybody and get the right people together in the right place at the right time.

That's what we have in spades is human capital.

And we got to just keep leaning into that.

Great.

Thank you.

I'll open it up to questions.

Commissioner Clark.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Judge, for coming in and giving us uh your report.

Very uh insightful.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Commissioner Hill.

Thank you, Judge Walker.

We're so lucky to have you in this position, and thank you for your passion for Washoe County residents.

They deserve uh this attention.

And you're right, we have sadly been we the only resources in the past has have been the jail.

It's getting a little bit better.

I think um, and I think Commissioner, well, Chair Andrea asks, you know, what resources do you need?

Um certainly we know we need like 1,100 permanent supportive housing units in this community, which is heartbreaking because so many of those people are not just mentally ill, they're also just seniors who need physical support to live.

They do not have a family.

They and um and you know that we were written about um of uh million-dollar Murray, and that was about Reno and about how we can really help people if we find them housing and we find them the wraparound services and his wraparound services were sheriff deputies who checked in on him.

And when he when he had housing, stable housing, and someone checking in on him, he was successful, but he died on the streets of Reno from liver failure because he he didn't have that uh system that would support him.

And so uh I really appreciate your advocacy for um more units.

Uh we we want that here too.

It's so expensive to get them online, and it's incredibly frustrating because we've got folks at the CARES campus today who we need that permanent supportive housing who are just waiting.

And uh so hopefully we can really press on the state to find these resources.

I'm curious on the mental health um ecosystem in the community.

And I know it's something that has been map like we've been trying to map out as a region of what do we have out there?

What are we missing?

Do you could you shed any light on what is missing for resources on the ground before people get arrested and that zero?

I know we have a lot of uh resources that were missing in that piece, or anything else that we need to know or the community needs to know on those resources.

We need treatment providers.

Yes, okay.

We have a university with a really nationally renowned school of social work, a nationally rental renowned counseling school.

Um, my own daughter is a clinical um professional in the community, emergency family therapist who got her master's degree at UNR.

And it is almost impossible to keep people locally in the community who are providers because they can make twice as much working 100% virtually in California.

One of the challenges we had to get people evaluated was to implement uh telehealth evaluations because there are not enough psychologists and psychiatrists in the state of Nevada who are willing to work for what we pay to evaluate the needs of people.

So we need providers, we need a way to pay for providers.

And the message, I know you all get this, but the message I would I would uh throw out, especially to all of you who have political responsibilities to your constituents and budget responsibilities is not spending money on supportive housing is spending money.

It's spending money the most expensive way.

And so even though those permanent supportive houses are expensive, um, they are the least expensive way to treat the needs of the community.

Um because I assure you, the end result for the people who are competent for those people who we uh who belong in the system is I send them all to prison, and then they get out with untreated mental health issues, and they come right back to the community.

Worse, and it's a perpetual self-perpetuating cycle.

Yes, absolutely.

And um, on the providers, what I'm hearing is that the reason that they will work remotely in California is that Medicaid and reimbursement rate is dismal in Nevada.

And so perhaps something else we can fight for on the state level together, uh, because that's something that we need to make sure that we take care of here.

You have a remarkable head of human services in this county.

I've been privileged to work with.

I was the former foster care judge in this county, the former uh juvenile services judge.

We have amazing talent in this case in the county, amazing talent.

We just need to lead it, lean into it.

And I'm sure if you talk to Ryan about it, he has more than five ideas about what to do to gerrymander that Medicaid reimbursement rate.

Right.

And I'm sorry, one more madam chair uh question on the the fact that we have no waiting period now, because you have really cleaned up that system and found the resources we need, and we're lucky, let's be real, to have Lakes Crossing in the north.

Um, in the South, the reason that they're having these struggles is they do not have the beds uh at all down there.

And I know that a judge, and you you spoke to this a little bit, and I just was hoping you'd provide some clarification.

There's a judge in Clark County who is fining the state daily.

Yes, millions of dollars because uh they are not providing the resources for their folks.

Um and you had you had alluded to the fact that had you done that as well.

Okay.

And and you stopped doing that, or are we still doing that as a county?

Well, I don't know.

Okay.

Sure, sure.

Yes.

Judge Christy Craig has the notable history of being a former public defender like Miss Reigns and suing the state of Nevada twice.

Yeah, resulting in consent decrees against the state of Nevada for violating people's constitutional rights in this system.

And so she's fought this fought for decades, fought this fight for decades.

But the the dirty underbelly of that story is why has this gone on for decades?

I mean, the state has in place state plans from 15 years ago saying the state should do what we did in Washoe County 15 years ago, and it just never happened for a lot of political reasons.

Um I hope that answers your question.

But yes, Judge Craig, uh, like me is a fire brand to hold the state to account.

Look, we have this built-in state forensic system.

Fair enough, the state needs to build enough resources in to do it.

There are twice as many people waiting for beds as there are beds in the state of Nevada.

And it's been that way for decades.

Yeah, it's heartbreaking.

And I think just for the public, and I don't know if they fully understand this.

We can't create resources at Washoe County.

We can only ask the state for these resources.

And so we have a legislative session coming up, we have elections coming up.

We want to make sure that we can advocate for ourselves as a region because I think folks are frustrated.

Washoe County has so many people waiting at the CARES campus.

It's a not a success, or Washoe County has so many people waiting for mental health beds.

It's not a success.

It's like we're picking up the pieces on the state level.

You have been such an incredible leader helping us with people on the ground.

Thank you for not waiting.

But it we can only do what we can do with the resources we have today.

Let's keep the state some credit, if I may.

All right.

The state pays the cost of the treatment unit at the Washa County Jail.

So the state, in fairness to them, um fund that through legislation created at the last legislature by advocacy by state agents.

So the state has acted uh remarkably well.

Now, between you and me in the Feds post, if they didn't have two judges finding them $500 a day per person, they might not have the bandwidth with the governor to carry through at least councils that lift.

But we gotta, we gotta make it some noise on what we need.

And so thank you for doing that, and thank you for your leadership.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Commissioner Herman.

I well, I'm I'm very grateful for the meeting we had, the wall back and I just wanted to thank you for being that person that goes way beyond the call of duty.

You you don't just sit in the seat up in front of the room.

You get out there and work.

And I'm so grateful for that.

Thank you.

It's it is my privilege to serve.

Thank you.

Vice Chair Garcia.

Madam Chair, I just want to say thank you for bringing this presentation forward.

Um I was very excited to hear the updates, and I was just absolutely blown away with the metrics that you provided us here today.

So, Judge, Judge Walker, Chief Judge Walker, I should say.

I just find yeah, I just appreciate your vision and your leadership so much.

I know uh many people in this room uh would agree with us when we say thank you.

Um if you could pull up the slide that says competencies competency court works together, and it was a column for Washoe County courts.

Yes, that one.

Um, this is the one I have a question on.

I really love that you drew uh our attention to you know the power of the people, the subject matter experts that we have within these departments and divisions, and the systemic change that comes from them sitting together, collaborating, and finding solutions to these very complex problems.

Um I wanted to um go back to our very first summit, um, the one that was hosted at the Whitney Peak.

I remember sitting in that room, and well, first of all, I was just blown away that we could get that many people in in those roles and elected officials and representatives from everywhere in the same room talking about this.

That was really the first step to this successful um intervention, I guess, or the system.

Um, but during that meeting, we talked a lot about the breakdowns related to data sharing and data communication and how many of us were spinning our wheels or hitting roadblocks because of that.

Can you give me an update on where we are?

And I wanted to pull that slide up to see if there was other areas that you wanted to emphasize or for us to know where there's still problems in sharing communications and and information about these um folks that are passing through uh the various services that we provide.

One benefit of the trauma associated with DSU was that all pretrial screening in the county now happens through court pretrial services.

And so at Intercept one and two, where people are detained.

I now have data from court employees about who's being arrested and what they're being arrested for.

Let's be clear.

Um, we judges love us up, we love us our silos.

You know, I always joke with all of you when we meet.

There's 16 judges and 32 opinions on any subject, and that's true across the county and true across courts, but there's some magic happening.

What do I mean by that?

So, Judge Birchy, I think is gonna approach all of you about a new court, a new specialty court she has in mind, which I strongly support.

She and I meet regularly, as does the chief of the Reno Justice Court.

I promised, I promise all of you uh you'll probably fall over when you see it, but you're gonna see he and I present together to you about how we're gonna break some of those data sharing silos.

I don't know what happens at the justice court, I just don't.

I don't know what happens at the community court either.

Is that stupid?

Yes.

Does it serve the people we serve?

No.

Um I can only kick down so many doors.

So many doors at a time.

Yeah.

So we still struggle to get data about human beings.

I'm fond of saying human beings don't live in the silos we create.

Right.

Uh you know, I seated a jury in a criminal case yesterday.

Um, I reminded all those people that uh the gift they get for uh stepping forward to their civic service is a parking ticket because there's no place to park around the courthouse where we ask people to come.

And that metaphor goes across the county.

People don't understand why they appear in front of Judge Spoo in Sparks Muni court and Judge Walker in district court, and the two judges don't even talk to each other.

It's a problem.

Um the sequential intercept model is the answer.

How do we break down data sharing across courts, uh across police agencies and across the county?

And we're working on it.

There is a plan behind the strategic or behind the sequential intercept model.

That plan has been shared with all of you.

I look forward to presenting that plan to all of you in the coming months.

Great.

Thank you.

I think uh years ago, the school district was using you know every child by name and by face, and I think that translates really well to the work that you do to the work that we do here at the county.

We've seen it in the way that we interact and engage with our unhoused population.

Um so like any uh issues that deteriorate over time, it's usually because of a lack of communication, and in this case it's a lack of of data.

Um so we're only as good as as the systems that we have in place to communicate and collaborate with each other.

So I really look forward to the progress we make in that realm.

So thank you so much again for being here today.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Well, you might have a new title, uh Chief Judge Walker and be the silo buster.

So uh we'll all be rooting and doing what we can.

I just wanted to share with you.

I thought if you're not aware, and you probably are, but the Hope team, in terms of their tenancy support, has a 94% success rate.

A 94%.

And so that's why the SEM is so amazing in terms of encompassing our whole community in such a way that not only saves millions of millions of dollars, but saves lives, puts people back into a protective keeping them out of the gel and being productive citizens, and I think um people see you and don't necessarily feel or see the connection of all the other things that are happening with the SEM, including the CARES campus and our place and many of the other tenancy support, the Hope team, everyone's working together, and I do remember that first symposium.

I attended the second symposium, and I look forward to the third, where we just see silos busted everywhere and and we see a continued success.

But on a very serious note, I will continue to continue to ask what you need, and I hope we can do whatever we can to keep uh you and um is it miss Hutchinson?

Um, and and I remember when you asked, I said, what did you need?

You said I need one.

Uh I think you said you needed one or half FT, and I said, a half FT, there's no way you need a full FT.

So I don't remember exactly if that's how it went down, but if you don't ask, you know, and and the data is supported.

We're a data driven um in terms of decision making.

It's an integral part of our decision is the legal component and the data that supports it and the subject matter experts that are there, and you're proving it.

So thank you.

Thank you so much.

Look forward.

When are you coming back?

Anytime you ask.

All right, thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And thank you as well.

All right.

Well, we are going to close uh item 583 and move to donations.

And Vice Chair Garcia, if you would be so kind.

Of course, Madam Chair.

Today I move to approve two donations, a gift card donation from True Vista for the minor guardianship program, and $4,425 in gift cards, so that costs of volunteers can take their assigned children to outings.

Is that in the form of a motion?

Yes, madam chair.

I have a motion by Vice Chair Garcia.

Do I have a second?

I have a second by Commissioner Herman.

Do we have any public comment on this item?

There is none.

Okay.

Any further discussion?

Hearing none, I'll call for the motion.

All those in favor signify by saying aye, or the screen accordingly.

It's not popping up.

Okay.

I believe if there are any nays, motion carries unanimously.

Thank you.

We'll move now to the consent items 7A1 through 8G.

Is there any uh commissioner who'd like anything polled at this time?

Hearing none, I'll ask for a motion for items again 7A1 through 8G3.

So move.

Okay, we have a motion by Vice Chair Garcia.

We have a second second by Commissioner Hill.

Any further discussion?

Do we have any uh public comment?

There's none.

Thank you.

Hearing none, I'll call for the vote.

All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you.

I'll ask now to move to the block, Commissioner Herman.

If you would recommend the block vote, please.

And those numbers would be nine, ten, and eleven.

And that's in the form of a motion.

Motion.

Thank you.

We have a motion by Commissioner Herman.

Do we have a second?

Second.

Second by Commissioner Hill.

Any further discussion?

Any public comment.

There is none.

Hearing none, I'll call for the motion at this time, or I'll call for the question.

All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you very much.

I'm still thinking about Judge Walker.

That was amazing.

Okay.

We are going to okay.

Let me make sure that I are now going to move to item number 12.

Item eight.

We have number eight.

Item eight.

Oh, see.

Good thing that we have wonderful people that are supporting this.

And I even have it right here.

Number eight.

Um, thank you, Miss Will Mound County Manager.

Would you like to introduce item eight?

Or do we need the ordinance first?

We're gonna kick this one.

It's a first reading to a Madam Clark.

First reading.

This will be bill number 1945, if approved.

An ordinance to establish an expedited review process for qualified attainable housing projects and for affordable housing types in compliance with assembly bill 540.

Thank you, Miss Oakley.

How are you?

I'm well.

Thanks for having me.

Uh, for the record, Kat Oakley with Washington County Planning.

I have just brief presentation for you today.

This is about a development code amendment to establish some expedited processes for attainable housing projects.

A little bit of background.

We've talked about some of these things before, but we all know that we face great housing affordability challenges in these in this region.

And just an update on uh some numbers I've shared with you previously.

Um we've talked about the percentage of our population of renters that is cost burdened, so spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs.

That number has gone up to 50.5%.

So we're above that 50% mark now.

Um we have seen a you know waffle back and forth kind of in the in the high 40s to low 50s range over the last several years.

So that's where we're sitting right now.

This is a statewide issue, really a nationwide issue.

And so that's why during the most recent legislative session, we saw a number of bills adopted to address housing costs, and one of those bills was AB 540.

And this development code amendment would bring us into compliance with the the changes needed of us to align with that bill.

I'm gonna start with the definitions and some proposed changes there because that's really one of the big things that AB 540 did.

So previously in NRS, uh there was affordable housing, and that's what was in NRS, and there were four different tiers of that housing up to 120% of the area median income or the AMI.

What AB 540 did was it changed affordable housing to attainable housing.

And so now it's got the same name, and also there is a new fifth tier that goes up to 150% of the AMI.

So that's really getting more into that kind of traditional workforce housing category rather than um the affordable housing as it is typically treated at at state and federal level.

So that was the big change that came out from AB 540.

And so we're proposing to update our definitions to reflect and and mirror those new state definitions, and then they also um have something in this bill called an attainable housing project, and that's a project specifically that receives a grant of money from the Nevada Attainable Housing Account, which is the fund that they set up through this bill to support the development of attainable housing.

And so those are the new definitions proposed, and um what we're going to use those to do is to create um the required expedited processes.

So first looking at attainable housing projects.

So again, these are those projects that are receiving funding from the state, um, and they're also going to be uh for folks with an AMI of 150% or less.

Um the proposal here in in alignment with AB 540, and this is what's required by that bill, is to allow those projects to have not go through a public hearing process if that process would otherwise be required.

And that's for everything except for a tentative map, which is treated differently in the bill.

And so we're proposing instead that if if a special use permit or an administrative permit would be required, um, that we would instead allow them to go through the administrative review permit process.

That is a process that has a public noticing component, has an agency review component, and so it allows us to do that more complex review, but it does not go to a public hearing.

The decision is made by the director of planning and building.

And so um that's how we're proposing to comply with that requirement of the bill.

And the the B here is just that anybody seeking to use this process would need to provide evidence of the funding received from the state, which qualifies them for expedited review in this way.

So that's the first type of expedited review.

And then the second required by AB 540, and that we're proposing is to prioritize any attainable housing or that tier one through five affordable housing in review over all other projects.

And so that's the language from AB 540.

Now, like I said, there's attainable housing projects and there's attainable housing.

They actually in this uh new bill, they mean different things.

And so for clarity's sake, we're saying projects that qualify as tier one through five affordable housing, so they're in those AMI categories.

They can request a staff liaison to facilitate the review process.

That's how we're proposing to expedite the review.

Um, and and that staff liaison would help coordinate the different agencies that take part in a review in order to facilitate and move the process along.

So that's the expedited process that any housing project, whether or not it receives funding from the state, so long as it's in those income categories, they can use this process, and they would just need to provide evidence that they are going to fall within those income bans.

That's all there is to this one.

The planning commission heard it in February and voted unanimously to recommend approval, being able to make all four of the required findings.

Um recommendation for them is to introduce and conduct a first reading, and I uh here's a motion.

I'm happy to answer any questions you have.

Thank you.

Well, I want to thank you for certainly not only implementing as quickly as possible all of the um provisions that were passed in AB 540 in the governor's bill, but certainly looking at the administrative process and streamlining with or without any bills.

That is welcome.

So certainly appreciate it.

Um, this is a first reading, so I'll entertain a motion.

Madam Chair, I move to introduce and conduct the first reading of bill number 1945 as outlined in the staff report.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, we do have public comment on this.

Thank you.

Pat Davison.

And she does have documents to be distributed.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair Andreola, members of the commission, my name is Pat Davison.

I'm a resident of district five.

Today we're here talking about more changes to the county's affordable housing program as a result of state legislation that passed last year.

I'm not a fan of state mandates, preferring local control whenever possible, but in this case, the state mandate appropriately tries to fill the gap in the affordable housing picture, the missing middle income level, and more importantly, this mandate comes with money.

We are not abandoning the lower income levels, but we are expanding the income spectrum with new programs and funding for that population segment up to 150% AMI.

These are households that make too much money to qualify for subsidized subsidized housing assistance, but don't make enough money to rent or purchase a home in our local real estate market.

The chart I prepared for you tries to simplify the two new definitions and their corresponding changes you are being asked to consider today.

The first group of changes creates a new class of affordable housing called an attainable housing project.

That may sound like a general label, but it refers to a very specific type of project, one that receives some of the new state funding.

It also gets as a new benefit or incentive and expedited review process.

The second group of changes creates another new class of affordable housing called tier one to five affordable housing.

This also refers to a very specific type of project, one that must show evidence that it provides housing for the 150% or below income levels.

It also gets two new benefits with the assignment of a staff liaison if requested and project prioritization.

Both of these benefits should help with the expedited planning process for those tier one to five projects.

Please note that as I understand these changes, the first group, the attainable housing projects, will also have access to the project prioritization and staff liaison just by virtue of these projects also being included as the tier one to five.

So here's a great set of new tools to add to your toolbox.

I uh ask you to support these changes as proposed by staff and approved by your planning commission.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Davison.

All right.

We are going to close item eight and we'll move to item 12, which is the recommendation to appoint one candidate.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We do have a list of candidates on the agenda, and we have Alexandra Wilson here from the County Manager's Office to walk you through the selection process.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, members of the commission.

Before you, you do have nine candidates for the single position as the lay member on the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Advisory Planning Commission.

At this time, we are asking that you select your top two candidates for the single position via a ballot that will pass around by the clerk.

Okay, it's two, not one.

Two for the same two, two for one C.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Hill recommends Philip Gillenfarr and Christopher Wood.

Commissioner Clark, Rob Pierce, and Harry Swenson.

Chair Andreola, Harry Swinson, and Christopher Wood.

Commissioner Garcia or Vice Chair Garcia, Joel Martin, and Harry Swinson.

Commissioner Herman, Philip Gilfillenfarr, and Harry Swinson.

Thank you.

Before we move forward, is there any public comment on this?

Yes, there is.

Thank you.

Harry Swinson.

Harry Swinson.

Yes, sorry, spoke earlier.

I don't really have a question.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Christopher Wood.

Yep.

Thank you.

Uh Chris Wood again.

Um I am a resident of Incline Village and an applicant, of course.

Um, the reason I came to speak the second time was to continue with uh comments about what the uh function of the um of the APC is.

Um and I I wanted to emphasize in particular that the APC is an organization much like the community, excuse me, the um the CAVs because the citizens advisory boards, because what that organization does, the CAB, is collect information from the community and pass it on in theory to the county.

And the county has that information that's current with what's going on out in the uh the hinterlands of the county, and so it's a great function.

The APC works the same way.

It is not just a technical organization, it's not just for planning, it's for collecting lay opinion as well.

And in fact, the position that is available today is the lay representative.

That's the title of it.

And the lay representative of it, if you go to the uh websites, and I think I'm uh quoting directly from the um TRP website, it's uh for passing on the perspective of the community.

That's the position of the lay representative.

Um it's not for passing on regulatory knowledge, it's not for passing on scientific or technical knowledge, is for gathering information from the uh community.

I point out in my application my roles that have occurred in the community as well as um what um I will be continuing to do regardless of what we do here today.

I participate in the CAB.

Um and um I also participate uh privately in the rotary.

I particip I have participated in the um the TTD, that's the Tahoe Transportation District um subcommittee that looked at the old elementary school site in Incline Village for a transit hub and decided not to make it a transit hub.

So I participated in that organization as well.

Um I've also participated in the Tahoe Living Working Group.

That is an organization organized by the advisory planning commission to collect data about what um what is needed in the Tahoe Regional Planning agencies um uh new plans, planning.

So um those are the things I offer for you.

Um I understand you've got a great group of people to select from, and I think you'll make the right decision, I'm sure.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Philip Gillenfar, followed by Jim McNamara, Philip.

Mr.

McNamara.

Good morning or afternoon, thank you.

I'm uh Jim McNamara.

You're uh currently uh appointed member of the uh TRPA APC.

I want to thank you, everybody uh for the opportunity I've had to serve on the AP APC.

And I want all the other candidates to be aware of the excellent quality of representation Washoe County enjoys.

Uh a member of our governing board, Commissioner Hill that does Sterling work.

I can't say enough about the planners, both Cat Oakley, who would who just spoke to you and Eric Young.

Their perspectives and their experience are invaluable.

It's so proud when I'm sitting next to them and uh the other members of the APC uh present you know for their county that that we have such a deep bench and such great people.

Um I'd also uh I I know you uh as it was just mentioned.

You have a tremendous bench of uh volunteers uh this time two years ago when I was appointed by you.

Uh uh there was the incumbent and me.

Uh, and it wasn't even uh a board position that I was seeking.

Uh I was asked if I was would consider it.

And I'm glad that there's so many members of Washoe County that are interested in getting into this.

Uh I do want to uh express that uh I went to an awful lot of those Tahoe Living Working Group meetings throughout uh the lake, every community, and several in Klein and King's Beach.

There is a tremendous need for affordable housing, just like just like you were discussing in uh last speaker.

Uh it's not gonna go away.

Uh I was living up there 40, 50 years ago, and the same things were happening.

Prices were going up.

All the all the people that were small business people and trades people moved to Carson City, moved to uh King's Beach, moved out of the area because they couldn't afford it.

And it's been nothing but continue on that on that track.

Uh I don't think uh there are there are groups that uh I don't know if it's political or not, but they are uh are very dead set against any uh any continuance of pursuing affordable housing up at Incline.

I don't get that from any other meeting around the lake.

Uh I respect their position.

I listen to them at every meeting.

Uh there's an awful lot of political accusations that are made.

No one here in the APC or or the governing board is taking money from developers or or somehow uh not to be trustworthy.

I thank you again for your time.

Thank you.

There's nobody else signed in.

Thank you.

Um I would just like to state that the pool of applicants were impeccable.

I mean, truly, that is not a word that I use lightly, exceptional, unpeckable.

The interest of everyone to serve and um helping the community is also to be thanked as well.

So I guess at this time, um, it looks like um Miss Um Wilson, it looks like we have um Mr.

Swenson.

That is correct.

Okay, I'm just confirming.

Yes.

So I'm guessing we need a motion to codify that.

Do we?

So I'm gonna entertain a motion then, Madam Chair.

I move to approve Harry Swinson as uh outlined in the staff requirement.

So Vice Chair Garcia is the motion.

Do we have a second?

Commissioner Herman, we have a second.

Any further discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying I or pressing the screen as you're saying I didn't come up on the screen.

We have your vote.

Thank you, Commissioner Clark.

All right.

Congratulations.

Again, thanks to all of the folks who applied.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, good afternoon.

I'd like to call the meeting back to order for the Board of County Commissioners for the March 10th meeting at 102.

We're now going to move to um item 13, but before we do, I'd like to just give a couple announcements, if I could.

So thank you all for coming.

Um, we do have a responsibility to ensure the safety of everyone, and so there is a capacity in terms of this room, and we are going to be watching for that.

And and so if we do uh get into that capacity issue, we might have to ask folks.

There are seats in the lobby if you'd like for your own comfort as well.

There's a screen you can watch as well.

So just wanted to make sure that if I do have to make an announcement, it's not intended to be anything but safe for everyone.

So I appreciate that.

I'd I'd also ask if I could if everyone could maybe turn off their cell phones just because we have a lot of folks in here, and we want every voice to be heard and everyone to have the opportunity to hear each other as well.

So I see three or four seats on there as well.

Okay, I guess there might be some empty seats if you wanna look and see.

Find a friend.

Oh, they've got pointed here.

There's a seat.

I think there's one over there.

Anyway, oh, we've got folks who are helping.

If there are empty seats, maybe you can hold up for a moment and people can find seats.

There's one right down in almost the first row.

No one wants to move.

Well, listen, the uh the choice is yours.

The choice is yours.

I don't want to deprive anyone from their space and their comfort.

So um, I am gonna open this up and then I'll I'll go into a little bit more, but we are on item 13.

Manager Thomas, if you would be so kind.

Certainly, thank you.

This is a public hearing, and we're hearing an appeal of the Washa County Planning Commission's denial of a tentative subdivision map, case number WTM 24-001, also known as SEER Reflections, and special use permit case number WSUP 25-0019 for a common open space tentative subdivision map for a 940 lot common open space development with lots ranging in size from plus or minus 2876 square feet to 68,000 and eight square feet.

The project includes major major grading of 3.6 million cubic yards of excavation, 625,000 cubic yards of fill.

It meets the standards for a project of regional significance because it contains housing of more than 625 units, sewage use greater than 170, 187,500 gallons per day, water usage greater than 625 acre feet per year, and traffic counts greater than an average of 6,250 trips daily.

As such, any approval by Washoe County is provisional, subject to the Trucking Meadows Regional Planning Commission's finding that the project is in conformance with the Trucky Meadows Regional Plan.

The applicant also seeks approval of special use permits for utility services, which includes water tanks and two lift stations, and three bridge crossings over the sensitive stream zone and critical stream zone buffers for the Steamboat Creek and Browns Creek Creek.

The applicant and appellant is World Properties Inc.

And the proposed project is in the South Valley's planning area to the west of old 395, south of Pony Lane between Pleasant Valley and Old Washoe City.

And the board shall consider the appeal based on the record on appeal and testimony and materials submitted at the board's public hearing.

The board may affirm, modify, or reverse the planning commission's decision.

If the board reverses the decision of the planning commission, it may remand the matter back to the planning commission with instructions, or the board may directly grant the application.

This is going to be presented by our community services department.

And so we'll jump on in, Madam Chair, if that's what you'd like to do.

Before we do that, if you could hold on one moment, I'd like to just go over a couple other things just in the spirit of collegiality and respect and we really care about everything that you're going to say.

But if you would be so kind, just because this is a business meeting, and we really appreciate your appreciation for the professional decorum that is expected of all of us that if there is comments that you either disagree or agree that you hold those comments to yourself, clapping, that kind of thing, because procedurally we're trying to move through everyone getting the same equal chance.

And I know what everyone says is important to all of you, and it's important to all of us.

So I just want to ask for that respect.

More people are coming in.

So someone's doing the safety count, I'm hoping.

Okay, I'll be watching if if we need to um just procedurally uh what we'd like to do because of the complexity of the project.

Uh, we'd like to extend an opportunity for 15 minutes for staff, 15 minutes for the appellant, an opportunity for public comment with each uh public commenter with the three minutes, and then we'll bring it back to the board for deliberation and follow-up.

So hearing uh that outline of uh this next item will go ahead and ask that you start your presentation and thank you.

Thank you.

Um Chris Bronzik, senior planner, Washoe County.

So we're looking at the appeal for tentative map uh WTM 24-001 and special use permit WSCP 250019.

And this is for the Sierra Reflections subdivision and associated infrastructure.

So this is an appeal, and it is uh the appellant is World Properties.

The planning commission heard this in January 6th of this year, and they unanimously denied this request.

The appellant is uh the the reasons that were provided are that the denial of the tentative subdivision map and special use permit was arbitrary and that it constituted an abuse of discretion, arguing that it disregarded substantial evidence in the record, including staff's uh approval recommendation and expert analysis addressing geotechnical conditions, remediation, hydrology, aquatic resources, cultural resources, traffic, and fiscal impacts.

This is a vicinity map provided to you.

Uh, the blue outline properties are um the proposed development, and to the right is the landscape plan that was submitted as part of the development.

And so that is showing the overall layout with the associated parks as well as where the creeks run through the subdivision.

So this project and this property has uh significant project history.

So in 1984, there was what was called St.

James Resort or Sierra Revolutions.

And it received a conditional special use permit for a resort containing 250 hotel rooms, a small casino, and 550 condominium units, as well as a golf course.

That was amended in 1991 to allow for 350 hotel rooms and a reduction of condominiums.

Fast forward to 2002.

There was a lawsuit based off of the regional plan that was proposed to be implemented.

Uh that lawsuit was led by Washoe County and the Sun Valley GID.

And it resulted in what we refer to as the settlement agreement.

And so these properties were associated with that.

That settlement agreement.

And what resulted was a down zoning of these properties for a maximum of three dwellings per acre.

And it went through that process in 2004.

It was approved, and regional found it in conformance with the regional plan at that time.

They were originally allowed for 1,090 residential units.

In 2006, the original iteration of Sierra Reflections came before the county, and it was approved by the Washoe County Planning Commission.

There were a series of development agreements and extensions that came after that.

And ultimately, what happened was that application and those series ended up expiring.

And so what's before you is the new submittal with updated documents and updated studies associated with that expiration and meeting current code.

So the Sierra Reflections subdivision is a 760-acre property over 29 parcels.

They're proposing 940 lots over a number of regulatory zones that regulate density.

The primary ones that are going to be dictating the density associated with this is that medium density suburban, which allows for three dwellings per acre, low density suburban, which allows for one dwelling per acre, and medium density rural, which allows for one dwelling per five acres.

There is also general rural, but that typically is the steeper slopes, but it does allow for one dwelling per 40 acres.

Associated with this development is uh lots ranging in size from 2800 square feet to 68,000 square feet, and there's associated grading.

Additionally, the special use permits, there are two 375,000 gallon water tanks, two sewer lift stations to uh handle uh this subdivision, as well as three bridge crossings that are going over the critical and sensitive stream buffers of what we call uh significant hydrological resources, in this case Steamboat Creek and Browns Creek.

This is an overall trails map that was provided by the applicants.

They're showing eight miles of paved and unpaved pedestrian pathways, 2.2 miles of equestrian trails, and these trails will be maintained by the HOA if they're not accepted by the county.

Associated with this project is also three neighborhood parks.

Um, two of them we would classify as pocket parks, and then there's a community park associated with this as well.

It's important to note that as associated with this project, there's 61% of the total property that is being preserved for open space.

So there's substantial grading associated with this project.

Um 3.6 million million cubic yards of uh cut, 4.225 million cubic yards of fill.

Most of that will be balanced from uh the cut, but there will be 625,000 cubic yards that is still going to be imported to the site.

So part of this project is that it does trigger hillside development.

And the throughout the application, they do go through and they talk about the acreage associated with those percentages of slopes.

429 is what we would classify as most developable, so 429 acres.

177 acres is developable, but there's some additional standards associated with it, but that is in that 15 to 30 percent category, and then 153 acres is slopes greater than 30 percent.

So staff was uh staff believes this is consistent with Article 424 due to how the project is uh is designed and how it responds to the existing topography.

There was a biological resource uh assessment that was submitted as part of this application.

That analysis does uh contain the property boundary as well as a half mile, uh quarter mile buffer from the property.

Uh there were special status species that were identified, and there were metigation measures that are implemented in our conditions of approval associated with that biological assessment.

It's important to also note that Endow, uh Nevada Department of Wildlife did review and provide conditions of approval associated with this request.

And then, based off of what was submitted and our discussions with other agencies, no endangered species have been identified on this property.

So there's mercury remediation associated with Sierra Reflections.

It is part of that Carson River Mercury Superfund site.

There were 449 total samples that were collected across the site.

Of those 449 samples, 81 exceeded the residential action level of 7.1 milligrams.

And based off of what was submitted, we were able to make a recommendation of approval.

This is the overall Carson River superfund site.

And to the right, you will see what is specific to the Sierra Reflections property.

So it travels along the uh Steamboat Creek.

There was a cultural resources document that was provided as part of this application.

What was stated and concluded within that was that all previously identified cultural resources that qualified for the National Register of Historic Places have been mitigated and required no further consideration.

And there were 49 total sites identified within this assessment.

There was a geotechnical report that was provided as part of this application as well.

And this analyzed fault lines, uh seismology, uh geology in the soils of the site.

What it concluded is that the site is suitable for development.

They did recommend uh certain setbacks associated with happenable structures to that fault line.

There's also conditions associated with this that were reviewed and provided by our engineering division.

There was also an aquatic resources or hydrology and water quality report that was submitted as part of this application.

There were multiple permanent waters, waters of the United States, uh, and ordinary high water marks that were provided and identified.

Washoe County Engineering did review this.

They did provide a number of uh conditions of approval associated with the floodplains as well as uh items related to the hydrology and water quality report.

So the school district.

Pleasant Valley Elementary School is what this development will be zoned for.

Uh, additionally, Hertz Middle School and Galena High School is also associated with that zoning.

What was provided to us from the Washoe County School District is that they do have sufficient capacity at full build-out for their schools to handle any children that are estimated in this development.

They also added that there are funding mechanisms to accommodate growth if it exceeds their projections.

There's also a modernization project associated with Pleasant Valley Elementary School that is anticipated for the 2029 to 2031 time frame, and there's also other uh mechanisms that they can utilize, such as zoning adjustments for capacity issues.

There was also a safe uh route to schools that was provided as part of this application and part of that agency review.

Uh, the applicant did agree to do off-site improvements associated with safe routes to school.

So, fire service is going to currently be uh provided by the East Washoe Valley Fire Station.

It's anticipated to go to the Washoe Valley Consolidated Fire Station, which was approved as a special use permit in 2023, and then it went through an extension of time in 2025.

That extension of time is due to uh funding uh funding mechanisms, and they are currently there's currently conditions associated with Chucky Meadows fire uh review associated with evaluating and finding additional funding mechanisms that will be uh conditions placed on that applicant.

So sewer will end up at Stumwharf, and it does have capacity.

The project is responsible to construct the force main through Pleasant Valley to tie to existing Washoe County infrastructure.

There is a sanitized sanitary sewer infrastructure dedication agreement that was put in place in 2016, and that agreement does require the property owners or their successors to design, construct, and pay for all the infrastructure to convey sewer to Washoe County's existing sanitary sewer collection system.

This project is uh expected to generate 8,865 uh four daily trips with 658 peak hour trips in the morning and 884 p.m.

peak treats uh trips.

There are two roundabouts associated with this development that were uh recommended as part of the traffic study, and dot reviewed this as well as Washoe County engineering, and these are required conditions of approval to be constructed.

There were multiple neighborhood meetings associated with this request that started back in 2024.

There was also an open house in 2025 that was associated with this.

There were substantial concerns associated with these meetings, water resources, trafficking access, schools, infrastructure costs, environmental health, public safety, as well as environmental impacts, the community character, lot sizes, and recreation and trails.

Prior to the January 6th public hearing, there were 51 emails, one voicemail that were received.

There were 37 comments that were submitted to our neighborhood meeting hub site, and there were 1600 signature petition that was provided to us.

All public comments that we received were in opposition of this uh proposal.

Similarly, at the public hearing, there were 44 public comments, and again, all of those were in opposition.

Staff was at the January 6, 20 uh 2026 meeting.

The plan commission was unable to make all the required findings.

However, staff was able to make all those required findings, which are outlined within uh the staff reports.

So staff did review this in coordination with local, regional, state, and federal agencies.

These agencies provided that technical analysis and subject matter expertise.

Those resulting recommendations and conditions of approval were incorporated into the project.

So this is the recommendation slide that we have for you.

Uh the board may take one of the following up uh actions.

You can move to affirm the planning commission's decision and deny.

You can move to reverse the planning uh commission's decision and improve.

Uh, or you can move to reverse the planning commission's decision and remand the matter back to the planning commission.

With that, I'm available for any comment uh questions you may have.

Thank you.

Do any of the commissioners have any questions at this time?

We are going to have opportunities for future um questions.

I do.

Sure.

Commissioner Clark.

Thank you.

First question is when when uh a presenter goes over time.

Is anybody else gonna get uh opportunity to go over the public?

Okay.

Um wait, excuse me, can you know the question?

I know what it is.

Okay, I thought you meant asking them and the appellant.

Right, right.

Fine.

Um let me move on.

Uh I want to see the uh the first map I think you showed showing uh Brown's Creek and Steamboat Creek.

Can you can go back to that?

And is there a Galena Creek?

Is that also in this property?

So it is next to it, I think.

Um those are both uh both waterways, correct?

Correct.

Okay, is uh is the Army Corps of Engineers looked at this at all?

If they had an opinion on the on this particular property, do we have any reports from the Army Corps of Engineers on this project?

The Army Corps of Engineers was uh sent this project to review um multiple times.

We did not receive any uh comments or conditions of approval from the Army Corps of Engineers.

Very well, thank you.

Then I want to uh go to the history slide that you had.

I think it was the next one.

The first history slide.

Uh I'm reading this and I'm I'm not clear.

It says in 2002, Washoe County and the Sun Sun Valley General Improvement District.

What was Sun Valley doing out in Washoe Valley?

What was the Sun Valley General Improvement District doing out in Sun Valley?

Or out in Washoe Valley?

Got me saying it now.

So the settlement agreement wasn't specific to Washoe Valley.

It was based off of the um uh uh the city expanding and the sphere of influence expanding.

And so this was just one of those properties associated with that settlement agreement, but it was not specific to just Washoe Valley.

So yeah, I was just one of the clarify clarification.

I mean, Washoe Valley is quite a distance from from Sun Valley.

I'm wondering why why Sun Valley General Improvement District would be part of a uh a uh protest or an agreement or a settlement, whatever it was down in in the the south end of the county.

Commissioner Clark, Michael Arch for the record from District Attorney's Office.

Um in 2002, Washoe County and the Sun Valley GID initiated litigation against the regional um regarding um the spheres of influence for city of Reno and City of Sparks.

Um, as part of that comprehensive settlement agreement after the litigation was concluded, um, it included all of Washoe County in terms of the settlements that were reached and different things, but just Sun Valley GID was just a part of that lawsuit with Washoe County as one of the co-plaintiffs.

Fair enough.

I just wanted to get out get that on the record and make sure everybody understood what was really taking place there.

So thank you for that clarification.

Um there was also uh talk about you talked about uh some development agreements that had expired.

Can you explain to the public who who you know are not uh down in the weeds here, the inside baseball, how expired what it means when an development is expires, what what takes place with that so when a tentative map expires, basically all the previous review, the previous history associated with it, um is out the window.

So we look at them submitting a new application for new current standards, and we review based off of those current standards.

Sure.

So it would be fair to say that was then, and this is now when when those go out the window, they all go out the window.

It's nice to know the history, but at the end of the day, when that expires, it it's no longer a viable uh project.

Is that correct?

The the original request is no longer a viable project.

So when we reviewed this, we reviewed it as if it was a new submittal.

So the opposite side of that is if something's approved, and let's say somebody else buys it, it gets sold, and then uh somebody else may have the opportunity to come back to this body or other bodies in the future and amend those existing agreements.

Is that correct?

May ask ask to do it.

I'm not saying that it could happen, but they could certainly if if a new owner we approve this project today and it gets sold, and a new owner comes in six months from now and wants to amend that, they have the opportunity to do that as well.

Is that correct?

Is that a correct statement?

That's correct.

So we do have processes uh such as amendment of conditions, if this were to get sold, applicants or the new property owners could come in for something completely different if they chose.

So this this particular project has the ability again, not to say it could happen, but has the ability to get changed and and maybe even add more units to it uh if it's approved initially developers have come back in the past to the county and asked for even more density.

Is that a correct statement?

The density for this is already so the the density for this project is already existing with the underlying zoning, and the density was kept uh in historical border county commissioners' meetings.

So that 995 dwelling units, if someone came back 10 years from now or five years from now, they can't suddenly go over that 995 units.

Fair enough.

I just wanted to get that on the record.

And then can you tell us a more about this fill?

We've got cut and fill.

We've got it, was it 3.6 million cubic yards?

Is that the number that that you said?

And then uh and then the fill was gonna be 4.2 million cubic yards.

That is correct.

So that's a lot of a lot of soil, isn't it?

A lot of a lot of uh movement there.

Very well.

Uh and this is also you stated uh superfund site.

Is this the only super fund site in the county at this point in time?

I think that is that a correct statement.

I think that would be a better question for Northern Nevada Public Health.

Okay.

Are they available?

Oh, well, if not, they'll they'll come in later, I'm sure.

We'll be here for a while.

Um again.

So the Army Corps of Engineers and the what about the Nevada Department of Environmental uh the Vade in on this?

We have anything for the state of Nevada, the Department of Environmental Uh Health or whatever the exact title is of that department.

Uh NDEP was uh sent this review uh multiple times as well, uh, as was Nevada Division of Forestry for endangered species, and we did not receive any comments or conditions of approval from either agency.

So Nevada Department of Forestry plus this the other Department of Environmental and the Army Corps of Engineers, all three of those have yet to weigh in on this project.

They did not provide any conditions or comments.

Very good.

Thank you.

That's all I have for now.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other commissioners?

All right, again, I'll just uh reiterate that we do have an opportunity to call you back and maybe even health can walk over and take their time because we'll be here a little bit.

So thank you so much.

We'll now move to the appellant.

And it's my understanding.

Are we going to have somebody online?

Is Doug Thornley active in the in the meeting?

I I believe I am.

Can you hear me?

We can hear you.

Oh, well, there he is.

We're confirming that you're here.

So we'll just start out and do a brief introduction.

Um, I just want to set the clock so it's 15 minutes, just making sure I wasn't sure if you heard that.

So just want to make sure.

Thank you.

For the record, I'm Dave Snellgrove.

I'll turn it over for the first few slides to Doug Thornley, and I'll flip through the slides for him and then I'll take the middle of the presentation.

Here we'll close.

Doug, off to you.

All right.

Well, uh Chair Andreola, members of the commission.

This isn't our right presentation.

This is I needed to stop.

We have a we have a presentation that was provided yesterday.

This is uh the planning commission one we had one specific.

Yeah, maybe we can reset the clock and get the right one loaded.

My health is walking over.

Apologize for the interruption.

Can I have my piece of paper back?

You're welcome.

This is when we have the music holding music.

Thanks for everyone's patience.

Just want to make sure we have the right information to share with everyone.

This room is getting warm, isn't it?

Oh, it's getting hot.

All these bodies in here, yeah.

Crank up to you.

There's no there's no fairs.

That's what I was gonna do.

Do you want me to?

Do you want it to do five or ten?

Okay, we're good.

Just want to let everyone know that it looks like we are going to proceed.

It looks like we've loaded the presentation, and so we're going to resume.

That was just a commercial break.

No, no elevator music.

I was waiting for the music.

All right.

Yeah, that's the slide I want.

Okay, good.

We'll start 15 minutes.

Thank you, sir.

Doug, off to you.

All right.

Well, good afternoon, Chair Andreola, members of the commission.

I'm Doug Thornley with Holland and Hart on behalf of the applicant or the appellant world properties.

Um as you saw from the the slide that was just up, uh, we brought with us a team of uh professionals who the applicant used after the expiration of the last tentative map to bring this application into conformance with more modern design standards, more modern technical requirements.

And so to Commissioner Clark's question earlier, uh, while the the earlier iteration of the tentative map went away, the underlying zoning did not.

And I think Mr.

Bronsick did a great job with the history in his presentation.

We have a couple more things that we'd like to point out.

But again, back in 1984, and even before that, um, a resort casino was on the property.

It was zoned tourist commercial, which is a much more intense, much more dense use.

Um, and as we work through as a region, the regional planning lawsuit in you know, 2002, 2003.

Um what happened is the city of Reno agreed not to annex sort of the more economically beneficial property, provided it was downzoned to this residential use.

Um what you see there is a 20 plus year timeline that shows from the time of rezoning, the county started to make uh you know public improvement plans, sewer line was approved.

Um, and and on the heels of that, an earlier iteration of the tentative map came through.

That tentative map existed for you know, goodness 15 or so years uh before it it was expired, and it was expired, I think for good reason because the like I said, the the design standards and the technical requirements for developing these sorts of properties had changed in the interim.

And the career staff at Washer County and the Board of County Commissioners rightly said, you know, the zoning's not changing, but we need you to take another crack at it.

We need you to go back and revise this plan to make sure that it complies with the standards we've put in place since its initial approval.

Go ahead, Dave.

And that's important that the zoning has not changed.

The zoning has been in place since 2003.

So for 23 years, almost a thousand houses have been allowed to be built on this site.

That policy decision was made back when um the jurisdictions were determining how they wanted the region to develop what they wanted to see in the future.

And and so this project really is an example of long-term planning in the region.

What's important as we go through today's meeting is that the master plan is aspirational.

It's a guide, it's a 10-year lookout at what we think is coming, what we think is on the horizon, but the zoning designation is what controls.

And we know that both because statutorily zoning takes precedence when it's inconsistent with the master plan.

And we know that because the Nevada Supreme Court has repeatedly held that a zoning ordinance does not need to perfectly adhere to the master plan.

The zoning ordinance is is what people look at.

It's what they use to determine what they can build, and it's the standard against which projects are judged.

This site has been zoned for residential development at this density for decades.

It's not a surprise, it conforms with the regional plan.

It's part of the master plan, as you'll see in a later slide.

Um, it's part of the TMSA.

And so what we're looking at today is not a policy decision as to whether or not 900 homes should be built.

What we're looking at today is whether or not the project as submitted adheres to the technical standards and the design requirements in the county code.

Chris did a very good job of going through the general project.

I'll I won't go into too much uh detail on this.

He covered some of the benefits, uh, you know, big ones eight and a half miles of trails and then equestrian trails and and uh 61% open space.

The clustering of homes preserves significant open space and provides publicly available trails and connectivity uh while providing much needed diversity in housing.

The staff's recommendation, part of the staff report identified in this middle here.

I have an excerpt from the staff report that was pulled out for the master plan that identifies uh that the rural framework is not universal across every property in the South Valley's planning area.

Um priority policy 5.1 states the following maintain large lot sizes outside the TMSA.

As Mr.

Thornley said at the start, and I'll go over and in the next slide.

This property is within the TMSA.

The TMSA is areas that would get community sewer and water.

Point out that back when 20 years ago, if you were going to hook up to uh just a septic system, you could do it on a one-acre lot.

That is subsequently changed to a three-acre lot, and now it is at a five-acre lot.

So the minimum lot size that you can have to be on a septic now.

It's five-acre lot.

And that was one of the rules that we had to we had to weigh in and uh consider as part of our update to this.

This map is a little dark, but there's a red line kind of squiggles around up there.

That is the trucking meadow service area.

You can see I've got part of the forest area plan on it, the South Valleys area plan, the Southeast Area Plan, Southwest area plan.

The TMSA area overlaps the South, the South Valleys area plan.

I'll speak to that specific.

That uh in the center of the graphic there, that's the property boundary.

It is within the red area, which is within the TMSA.

And out of the definition in the regional plan identifies truck and meadow service areas or uh areas within which municipal services and infrastructure will be provided.

Uh, this in this area includes the high-intensity mixed use core, tier one lands, tier two lands, tier three lands, where in tier tier three lands, um, where regional growth is prioritized.

So that's the area that we're in.

This is a exhibit about neighborhood types that's in the 2024 regional plan.

Down here in the bottom is a circled area that shows approved plan communities.

They're anticipating this has been anticipated in the regional plan for 20 years.

It's continuing to be anticipated in the regional plan.

Um the approval advances the county's uh long-term vision for this site.

It's been envisioned for 20 years, it's been planned into traffic, it's been planned into schools.

Uh all of the regional service providers have had this planned in.

So there are master plan policies that do identify and encourage what we're doing.

Policy uh from the South Valleys Area Plan 3.2 encourages common open space development and transfer of development rights to protect wildlife and vegetation, policy 4.3, protection of critical source water areas.

It was identified that both Browns Creek and Steamboat Creek run across the property.

Um parks and trails.

We're basically providing a regional park in here that'll be maintained and operated by the homeowners association.

Uh that's the 61% of the site, which is over 450 acres.

Um, policy 8.1, VT multi-use trail.

We have that incorporated.

It will become a multi-use trail, the old VNT railroad grade.

Um, some of the perfect statements from the significant hydrologic resources, two of them do encourage common open space developments to avoid hazardous environmentally sensitive areas.

So Mr.

Thornley talked about the we're in the TMSA.

The master plan and zoning have been in existence for many, many years for 20 plus years since settlement agreement.

You can see kind of the patchwork, it's not just consistent and doesn't say hey, everything's medium density suburban or medium density rural.

There's a reason for that patchwork, and that is found in the slope analysis map.

You go back and forth between this map and where the higher densities are, and the uh slope analysis map, the green are the zero to 15% slope areas.

The yellows and oranges are 15 to 30 percent, and reds are third or 30 percent steeper.

What we've done is overlaid our site plan on here.

We're working within the best areas for development.

These are the areas that are zoned appropriately for the types of use that we have.

We're also utilizing cluster development, which is Article 408 of the code, which is encouraged by the significant hydrologic resource element, and it allows for smaller lot sizes.

That is codified as part of your your rules.

So from the past uh layout, which is on the left to the current, the layout areas haven't really changed much.

They've stayed very similar because we are working with the right areas.

We were working with them in 2006, we're working with them again in 2026.

The two big areas that I will point out that changed, they're circled in yellow on the left.

That's the old plan.

Down the circle on the bottom had attached housing type.

That's been removed from the project.

Everything is detached.

And then also the upper one and the meadows area.

We've created a wider uh wider buffer for Steamboat Creek.

So there were concerns.

Chris went through some of these.

I want to point on four, but there were there were some others that were mentioned rural character.

We do bring 61.6% of the site in open space, infrastructure and fire station.

We know that's a fire station's big issue out in this area.

We'll have fiscal surplus and uh regional road impact fees and and fire will be contributing to the construction of the new consolidated fire station.

Environmental, we have done uh we've got an eight-foot cap in the meadows area where the mercury is most prevalent.

Um I have a slide and I'll show that, but the closest Washoe County example to that is a four-foot cap.

We spent about eight or nine months working with health department and engineering to come up, and we ended up coming up with an eight-foot cap.

And then traffic, the everything will operate a level of service B or better.

Uh the traffic will be about a half of the volume once you consider what's there now and this project would be about half of the volume that was on this when uh the highway used to be the only connection between Carson City and Reno.

Um this is an example.

This is at uh I think it's called Talos uh Pallas Valley now, used to be daybreak.

They had mercury on this site too.

They were required to do a four-foot cap.

And our Mercury expert worked on this property as well.

This is kind of what capping looks like.

What I put on there was a rough estimation of how tall eight feet of capping would be versus the four feet that they have out here.

We will have a reduction in the overall water flowing off of the site.

This is part of the uh hydrology report that was prepared.

The end condition after development would be 490 CFS, and it's it started at 516 CFS.

Access points.

We have two access points, roundabouts uh at both East Lake and then just south of Ponye, and also the yellow arrow.

So the purple arrows are the roundabouts are in the yellow arrows is a formalized access that can operate, it'll operate day-to-day as a gated access in the St.

James Village, but it'll offer an approved emergency access in the area.

So the project was analyzed by EK Economics and identifies fiscally positive situation for the county of 17.8 million dollars of net surplus, 1.9 million dollars surplus to the Trucking Meadows Fire Protection District, in addition to the pro-rata share that'll be paid is estimated $6.2 million towards the construction of that new fire station.

With that, I'll turn it back over to Doug to finish up on just a couple slides here.

Thanks, Dave.

Um, again, Chair Andrew, members of the commission, Doug Thorne, Colin Hart on behalf of the appellant.

We've taken the liberty of making a quick reference guide for the legal findings at issue in this project and citing to the staff report where your career staff has analyzed the technical documents, analyzed the rules that are in place under the Washoe County Code, and made the conclusion that this project does, in fact, comply with all of those technical standards and all of those design requirements.

Coordinating agencies were involved, I think.

Um, you know, the appropriate inference to make with regard to forestry and NDAP and the Army Corps is not that they've not been given the opportunity to weigh in.

Um, it's that they have no comments to make at this time.

Uh, it's it's not that they were left out of the process, it's that they received all of the same materials that the other coordinating agencies received and and passed on the opportunity to make comment.

What you'll see is that this staff report is supported by nearly 800 pages of technical documents.

That's an awful lot to get through.

And so go ahead, Dave.

You know, we we really appreciate your attention to this issue.

It's in it's important to the community, it's important to us.

You're about to hear several hours of public comment, and that's really important.

Um, but what it's not is it's not evidence.

The evidence that needs to be weighed today is the technical studies, the technical reporting, uh, and and you should judge for yourselves the veracity of the conclusions drawn by your career staff.

Um again, you know, it's our hope that you'll give the public the same attention you've given us during our presentation, the same attention that you've given your career staff during their presentation, um, but that you'll use that that time to craft your questions to the technical experts who are sitting in the audience to your career staff and to members of coordinating agencies who are in attendance.

What you'll find is that substantial evidence does exist that this project complies with existing technical standards and requirements of the Washoe County Code.

With that, we're available for any questions.

Thank you.

Any questions by any of the commissioners?

I do.

Commissioner Clark.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh could you switch back to that slide on uh of the fiscal aspects?

Please.

Yeah, the positive fiscal accent.

So that 17.8 million dollars, how is that figured?

When would that happen?

Is that uh is that at the end of the build out of this project?

Well, when does that 17?

Does it just appear as if this gets approved today?

Do we just a check for 17.8 million show up in the county budget?

Well, how does that play out?

Tell us, tell us more about that, please.

For the record, Ken Crater with Crater Consulting Group representing the owner and the applicant, that $17.8 million net surplus to Washoe County is based on a 20-year analysis period once the development commences.

So 20 years from now, so that's less than a million dollars a year.

Okay, very well.

Next, uh the answer to the next question was the built-out time.

So you think it's going to take about 20 years to build this project out, if and when it gets approved.

No, um this project should build out in about 10 years.

It could be faster, five or six years.

It just depends on the absorption.

Uh, but certainly don't expect anywhere near a 20-year build out.

Sure.

If this was approved today, how long before the first sticks come out of the ground building a house about?

So if this was approved today, it would take about one year to get all the permits approved.

The conditional letter of map revision, the 404 and 401 permits from Army Corps and NDEP.

And then after that, construction, the final map would be approved, construction would commence, and it would roughly take about a year and a half uh of grading and home construction before the first certificate of occupancy was approved.

So it's about a two and a half year process.

So it's going to take about a year and a half to move this almost eight million cubic feet of of fill.

Is that correct?

But between the cut and the fill, about two years to get that done.

Is that what is that what you're guessing, they would mass grade a significant portion of the site up front, but not all of it.

They would basically excavate enough material out of the uplands area, which is above the meadow, towards 395 and East Lake Boulevard, and use that to generate the fill material down in the meadow.

And the cap is why we have so much fill, because that meadow area basically um requires about one and a quarter million cubic yards alone just to create that eight-foot cap.

Uh so that work would be done initially.

So probably about 75% of the grading would occur up front.

So again, the timeline about a year and a half to move the soil?

It would probably take about six, eight months to move the material.

So during the time it's being moved, there's lots of dust, lots of contaminated dust particles floating around the valley.

Is that how we how how do you envision controlling those dust particles that are contaminated with some mercury?

That's why we've worked so long with engineering and district health to come up with the draft remedial action plan that details the construction process for that mercury contaminated material.

And there's all kinds of conditions within that draft remedial action plan on how that material is moved, uh, basically to minimize the amount of movement from that material.

And uh basically what happens is that material is being all moved within the meadow.

It's not being hauled off site, it's not being moved at the upland area.

We have designed a grading plan that basically provides pocket areas where that material can be excavated and moved uh without having to move it more than once.

And there's also requirements in there that if there's any need to stockpile where those stockpile areas go, but there's about three or four different areas that ultimately receive that mercury-laden material, and then that is capped with eight feet of clean uh fill material.

And there's also requirements in there for dust control for weather issues like severe thunderstorms and rains, all that is governed by Washoe County District Health, and they will take an active role in the construction process of watching things to make sure that the contractor complies with the draft remedial action plan, and then even testing upon completion of the grading to make sure that all those mercury levels within the residential area are below those EPA thresholds to make sure that everything was processed correctly.

Sure.

I'm I'm more concerned about windy days.

You know, there's certain days of the year where we get a little bit of wind because good tight flying weather down there in the South Valleys that blows trucks over, just wondering what it's going to do to these part dust particles blowing around.

Just a question.

Yeah, and obviously when those winds occur, construction would shut down, everything would have to be properly sealed, and uh dust pallet is put on.

Uh but again, that's all controlled by that draft remedial action plan.

And upon submittal uh the final map and then processing that final map, that remedial action plan will be finalized and approved by the district health department and uh northern Nevada Public Health, and then that will become the guiding document for the contractor who is charged to follow that remedial action plan.

Sure.

I want to shift gears a little bit.

So you mentioned fire station and uh contributing towards the the fire station, the consolidated fire station that's yet to be built, even though it's been approved for since 2019, I believe, but uh yet to be built, and you're willing to contribute to that.

I uh can you explain how that would work as well?

Yes, we have met with Trucky Meadows Fire Protection District, and in fact, I had multiple meetings with Chief Moore before, and now Chief Edwards, who by the way, you made a great selection for fire chief.

He's just uh an amazing guy.

But um, we have committed with the chief to contribute our pro rati share, and the chief has some current cost estimates on that station and basically has rooftop counts of how many existing um rooftops that station serves.

We know how many uh rooftops will be required for share reflections, and so we're basically uh committed to contributing our pro rata share of that estimate of cost that the chief has come up with.

And I know the chief is working diligently on what those costs will be.

I know that he met with a construction expert to do some value engineering here in the last few months, and uh we will do everything we can to help him out in in that regard to come up with a good solid economical station.

I've also learned through this process, just so you know that the last station that you had completed, which was done by uh Herschnell Clippenstein, great set of plans, very well done, very well thought out.

Thank you.

Uh I've got a couple more questions, but uh uh I do want to compliment uh our our fire chief.

He's doing a great job.

We're very proud of him.

We hope there's no problems at Reno Fire Department where they might try and hijack our fire chief, if you know what I mean, right?

Yes, absolutely.

Okay.

Uh the developer share.

When will this be paid?

Is it up front?

Is it back to what we talked about earlier where this 17.8 million dollars is gonna come over 20 years?

This fire station was six or seven million dollars to be built in 2019.

It's 12 or 17 million to be built today.

Uh God only knows what it'll be cost to build if we build it over 20 years.

So, how long, what time of a time frame?

If this got developed approved today, would you write a check for the fire station?

That's my question.

So basically, how long would it take to get this money?

Thank you.

Based on what we've discussed with the county and with the chief, is that uh we're going to pay our pro rata share at time of building permit.

But what the chief really wants to happen, have happened to move this thing forward, is he would like enough money up front to do the architectural and engineering design so he can really start moving the station forward in terms of going out and getting bids, getting accurate cost, uh, looking at bonding and how that might work.

So we, in working with the county, have committed that within I think 180 days of uh final regional plan approval and expiration of all uh all appeal processes, is that we will write a check for a million dollars, which will cover the cost of all that upfront design for architecture and engineering.

So he will get a significant amount of money up front, which will really allow him to move the construction of that station forward again with estimate, you know, detailed estimate, get bids, get bonding.

Very well.

Just uh for the record, I mean, we were gonna use the same plans that we already have that we used at the Apple station.

There may be some modifications, but but we already have plans.

I mean, we we could use those plans if we needed to.

So what else do you have for us that would help us along with this?

Fire station.

Well, the one comment that I will make, and I brought this up to the chief is I still think he could save a lot of money changing gears and going to a single story, but that's the chief's call, not mine.

I know there's all kinds of regulations that didn't exist 20 or 30 years ago as far as just the safety of employees, you know, what sort of space uh the fire crew needs to live in there.

Uh, but there will be some changes that need to be made to the plan just because it's a different side, different topography, different grading.

Uh, but uh based on those plans that were done, I have full confidence in the department's ability to take those plans out and get a qualified architect and engineer to design them.

Okay.

So I guess the final the final word is it's gonna be a pro-rata based on when you get building close of esc uh, not close of escrow, but certificate of occupancy on each property, you'll pay a prorated share of the money towards a fire station based on closed escrow's people moving in, sales, certificate of occupancy.

Is that is that correct?

Yes, based on what we've talked about as building permits, so even before a C of O and if this is approved tonight, then we would actually do a formal agreement and get that approved.

So that way all the rules have been agreed to by the county and agreed to by the developer.

So, as you stated earlier, this could be six or seven years to build this out.

It could be six or seven years before all the money comes to the uh fire district.

Is that is that a fair question?

Yes, with the ability then to bond it because he has a source of income as well as that upfront money for design.

Very well.

That's all the questions I have.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other commissioner questions?

Vice Chair Garcia.

Thank you.

Just a quick question on this slide before we move to public comment.

How did you calculate the 1.9 million dollars in surplus to Chucky Meadows Fire Protection District?

So the way EK Economics does their fiscal impact analysis is they look at all of the revenue that will be generated by the project to the county, uh, all the different tax streams, revenue, property taxes, sales taxes, and then they look at what the cost of services are for this project.

You know, what will the county have to deliver to this project in terms of road uh fire service, um, cruise equipment, uh, you know, what is the county budget going to increase by to serve this project?

And basically, then that difference between the revenue created and the money required to serve the project results in that 1.9 million dollar surplus calculation.

Any other further and that's based on time value money, excuse me.

That's okay.

Vice Chair Garcia, do you have anything else you'd like to add?

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

We'll now move to public comment.

And just a reminder that we all want to hear who the next speaker is, and we want to hear everything that everyone says.

So if we could just hold any of our um enthusiasm to internal versus external, that would be lovely.

So we'll go ahead and move to public comment at this time.

Thank you.

We have several people signed in, as you can imagine.

So I will call two names.

The first one will go to the podium.

The second person, please cue up to be ready to speak.

So first up, we have Jeanette Perrazzo, followed by Ryan Ramsdell.

Jeanette Perrazzo.

Okay.

Ryan Ramsdale.

Thank you.

Hello, Commissioners.

My name is Ryan Ramsdale.

Please enter my comments into the record.

I would like to address the discrepancies and inaccuracies of the serial reflections appeal.

The appeal states that the original tentative map was approved in 2006 against the same findings at issue today.

This is incorrect as 2006 findings are not the same as current findings.

The five findings required common open space development were added in 2025.

In the last 20 years, Washoe County has had three master plans, 1998, 2010, and again in 23.

And the Truckie Meadows Regional Plan is that has was revised five times.

2002, 08, 14, 19, and again in 2024.

Tentative subdivision maps finding A and special use permits finding A as well.

Both focus on the applications being consistent with the current master plan and the current versions of other applicants or applicable plans.

The claim states that Sierra Reflections facilitates upwards mobility for current residents, and entry-level or midterm housing does not reflect the current market trends.

Many area homeowners find it financially unappealing to move.

They are staying put as their mortgage rates are lower than current rates and enjoy the same put living in the proximity of the services.

Therefore, the development will not free up units for first-time home buyers as stated on page nine.

The appeal characterizes public comments as unsusbstantiated public outcry, subjective, subjective, generalized concerns, and general lay opinions.

This is an emotional issue for many residents, and some of the public comments reflect this.

However, these citizens felt strongly enough to stay until 10 p.m.

to voice their concerns.

It cannot be overlooked that 70%, 31 of the 44 people that spoke of the presenters gave in the public comment were fact-based, research-based, and objective findings on how the applicant did not make the required findings for approval.

The planning commission agreed as demonstrated by their unanimous decision to deny the application.

The subject property has many constraints which make it extremely challenging to develop.

At this time, the applicant is not acceptable as presented.

The applicant would benefit from utilizing citizen research and from implementing some of the 161 conditions identified by reviewing agencies to resubmit an application that complies with the current master plan and development code.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Beverly Silva, followed by Larry Moulton.

Good afternoon.

Please enter my comments and exhibits into the record.

My name is Beverly Silva, and I'm a homeowner in St.

James's Village.

I'm here tonight because the same developer proposing the Sierra Reflections Project is the developer responsible for St.

James's Village.

And his history should be of serious concern to this body.

This developer began the St.

James Village Project in 1992.

For more than 30 years, residents were promised amenities such as equestrian center, a hotel, and golf courses.

These amenities were used to market the community yet never materialized.

To this day, St.

James Village remains approximately half built out.

The developer has repeatedly requested extensions on tentative maps, allowing him to avoid financial responsibility for known infrastructure issues.

Most notably, Trekking Meadows Water Authority has determined that the existing water tree system must be converted to a loop system.

Excuse me.

Additionally, street sewer lines were installed more than 25 years ago, but never connected.

Further development of over 50% would require those aging, unused lines to be connected to the sewer system.

Again, a significant expense the developer has avoided.

Because of his lack of completion and oversight, homeowners have had to pay the price.

The HOA has faced serious financial and infrastructure problems, including having no insurance for wildfire risk, having private roads built with substandard materials, and severe underfunding of the HOA reserve account, creating a deficit of over 1 million dollars.

These failures resulted in a special assessment and ongoing increases to the monthly HOA fees to the residents who had no role in creating these problems.

Since 2020, St.

James Village and the proposed Sierra Reflections Project have been listed together for sale as a package, priced at approximately 50 million.

This shows that the developer's commitment is not to build or sustain community, but to sell.

Each has their own individual reason, but none of us wanted to live in a high density urban area.

We were promised in the master plan envisioned Washoe 2040 that the South Valleys would remain rural.

Many of us invested our money here based on that promise.

This document states that future residential development should mirror the existing development pattern and density.

Sierra Reflections is a betrayal of that promise.

Just two years ago, every member of this board enthusiastically endorsed and voted to approve this master plan.

In January, the planning commissioners recognized that the Sierra Reflections is a betrayal of that promise and unanimously denied the application.

You must now recognize that this development is a betrayal of the words you enthusiastically supported and uphold that denial.

When word of this misplaced high density development started to spread around the valley, the objection of the local residents was swift and decisive.

A petition of opposition was started.

On this petition, there's 1,828 hand signed signatures of your concerned citizens who strongly object to this high density development proposed for our rural area.

Recently, Washoe County publicly stated in their code of conduct they are committed to listening to their citizens.

So please listen to the over 1,800 citizens who have signed this petition objecting yet again to another revised Sierra Reflections application.

For over 19 years, we've expressed our concerns about this project.

This project has failed eight prior times to meet deadlines and/or comply with the findings of the development code, yet continued to get extensions.

It has failed yet again for the ninth time and for good reasons.

When word that Sierra Reflections had been resubmitted, a group of local citizens who are highly qualified by education and work experience in their subject matters formed 20 working groups to review the application.

Their exhaustive research documented areas of noncompliance and determined that this application does not meet numerous code findings that must be met for it to be approved.

The planning commissioners concurred.

The factual information provided in their presentation helped the planning commission make an informed and correct decision to unanimously deny the Sierra Reflections application.

Each of you have previously received a copy of the executive summary of these presentations.

Please listen to these presentations today and recognize that this project is not appropriate for the rural South Valleys.

Hopefully, you will come to the same conclusion as the Planning Commission.

Please uphold the Sierra Reflections denial.

Rick Cooper, followed by Delia Greenhock.

Hello, Commissioners.

My name is Richard Cooper, and I am a 25-year resident of beautiful Washoe Valley.

Please enter my comments into the record.

I'm speaking on historical preservation in relation to the Sierra Reflections development.

I will show that the application cannot make the required findings for approval.

Specifically, I am referring to the goals and policies for cultural resources and sensitive landscapes contained in sections 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 in Appendix 4 of the Vision 2040 Master Plan.

The unique geographic area, the proposed subdivision with its canyon, creeks, meadows, and other features useful to humans have drawn people for thousands of years and have many significant historic sites.

Native Americans and more recently, Euro Americans and Chinese workers have all left evidence of their activities.

NCR Principle 7.1, located in chapter 2, page 47 of Envision 2040 states that the developer buffer designated areas of critical environmental concern and known significant cultural resources from development.

Historic values are an example of cultural resources.

The archaeological studies conducted by COTS consultants and those reviewed by COTS are found in TAP H of the application.

They found 15 previous archaeological studies covering the entire project area.

These studies found at least 49 archaeological sites spread throughout the project, not just in the canyon.

These numbers illustrate the significance of the entire project area's human history.

There are historic sites not listed in the above studies.

Page 22 of the project narrative describes that besides developed areas, areas of open space disturbed by collateral construction damage may need to be remade, opening the entire project area to disturbance of irreplaceable historic sites.

The application does not address the overall significance of the project area as a historic site or the specific location, mitigation, and protection of each individual site.

Therefore, the policy of protecting and buffering the historic values demanded by the envisioned 2040 plan has not been met, and therefore the finding B, design or improvement cannot be made since the application is not consistent with the master plan.

Thank you for protecting our valuable cultural resources and unique history in Washoe County.

Thank you.

Dahlia Greenhog, followed by Loretta Lowe.

Good afternoon, Commissioners.

My name is Delia Greenhall, and please enter my comments and exhibits into the record.

I am a 50-year resident of Steamboat Pleasant Valley and have been on the Pleasant Steamboat Valley Landowners Board for 45 years.

I also have worked with our planning commission and commissioners on two master plans for the South Valleys, including the envisioned 2040, which was just approved.

The topography of this area lends itself to fires and floods, and I have personally witnessed three of the major events over the last 50 years.

The development is not consistent with envision 2040 or vision statement.

In relation to the Sierra Flections development, I will show that the application cannot make the required findings for approval.

The application references extensive historic sites on the property, but the developer has not actually identified all of the sites.

Five sites within the development boundary have previously been determined eligible to the National Register of Historic Places.

There are four Native American prehistoric sites and one historic site.

Also, there are Comstock error mills, mining, toll roads, farming history, the VT Railroad, the town of Willow Glen, and a Chinese town on this property.

Although there have been up to 15 previously archaeological studies in the project site over the years, and 49 sites located, they have not been properly identified, located, or buffered according to the requirements found in envision 2040 plan as stated in appendix 4, goal one.

For example, Calts Environmental Consultants found one of these 49 sites significant in previous studies.

Archaeologically significant means important and possible for preservation.

But the site is not mentioned in appendix tab H of the application that refers to cultural resources.

This significant as a site appears to lie unidentified and unbuffered within a grid of home sites on the application maps.

NCR Principle 7.1, located in element 03, page 47 of Envision 2040 states that the developer buffer designated areas of critical environmental concern and known significant or sensitive cultural resources from development.

This glaring omission of significant Native American and settler gathering site raises questions about the proper identification and buffering of the other 48 sites in the application.

Therefore, the policy of protecting and buffering the historic values demanded by envisioned 2040 plan has not been met, and therefore finding B, design or improvement cannot be made since the application is not consistent with the master plan.

The unanimous denial of the decision of the Planning Commission must be upheld.

Thank you.

Loretta Lowe, followed by Bob Burke.

Hello, Commissioners.

My name is Loretta Lowe.

Please enter my comments and exhibits into the record.

Envision Washow 2040 states that rural characters made up of many elements, the lifestyle of residents who keep horses and livestock, ranch-style homes, scenic vistas, nearby open spaces, and the presence of dark skies.

I will show that the application cannot make the required findings for approval regarding rural character.

Envision states future presidential development should mirror the existing development pattern and density, support agricultural uses, and maintain opportunities for livestock and farm animal ownership.

Sierra Reflections will not mirror existing density as shown in this map.

The existing density in Pleasant Valley is one unit per acre plus, and the proposed density in Sierra Reflections is more than triple at 3.2 units per acre.

Priority principle six from envision is to maintain agricultural practices to support local food growth and distribution.

The small lot sizes of the development would not allow agricultural uses.

An informal livestock inventory was conducted of 85 properties north from Pani Lane to Concho Drive, and 35% had livestock.

In Washoe County, the minimum parcel size for two livestock is 35,000 square feet.

Sierra Reflections lot sizes will not support opportunities for livestock and farm animal ownership.

NCR Principal's poll 1.2 of Envision is to preserve the remaining integrity of our region's dark night skies.

Preserving dark night skies was also recently identified as a top priority by the current Board of County Commissioners.

Despite county regulations, the lights from 940 homes and the lights from vehicles making 8,000 plus daily trips will significantly diminish the scenic resource of dark night skies.

This is also not consistent with specific plan standards and procedures.

That state, the specific plan benefits the surrounding neighborhoods, and will not have an undue and adverse impact on the reasonable enjoyment of neighboring properties.

Sierra Reflections will not support agricultural practices or livestock ownership, will not mirror existing density or preserve dark night skies.

So tentative subdivision maps, finding B and common open space finding B cannot be made.

Therefore, the unanimous decision of the Planning Commission to deny the application must be upheld.

Thank you.

Bob Burke, followed by Lisa Dayton.

Bob Burke, Washoe Valley, please enter my comments into the record.

Sierra Reflections does not conform with the Washoe County Development Code, Article 608, Section 110.60825.

A plan consistency.

And B design mandates consistency with our master plan in Vision Warshow 2040.

The following citations from Vision refute the applicant attorney's false claim that the opposition offered nothing more than unsubstantiated comment.

Page 104 and 105.

Livestock and agriculture are a significant contributor to the rural heritage of the area.

The valleys support portage farming and livestock.

Shear reflections will convert a valuable pasture into a patio homes on 2800 square foot lots and hundreds of houses on five to seven thousand square foot lots.

Our cattle ranchers already face increasing shortages in grazing pastures.

VSP beef and steamboat valley is forced to transport their cattle to Gardnerville, Fallon, and Yearrington because of insufficient local pasture.

The National Cattlemen's Beef Association states small rural communities are our backbone, so losing an underpasture would be devastating.

U.S.

beef cattle herds are at their lowest levels in 74 years.

There is no track housing in the South Valleys.

Agricultural, active agriculture and working lands require larger lots.

And to so specify in the County Code DC 04-003.

Bill number 1417 ordinance number 1238.

Furthermore, Section 110.210.30 of the decode states.

Clearly, our development code contemplates a distinction between Reno's high density photo two and the South Valley's open rural character photo three.

Narrow zoning citations by the applicant's attorney should not override the broad conforming features of a rural community delineated by envision Washoe.

The developer even admits on page 40 of their project narrative that their loting does not conform to traditional rural patterns, but justifies it by cluttering clustering tight density housing around a rugged, undeveloped canyon and designating it as open space.

Their plan does not reflect the area's character.

Don't let lawyer overtures persuade your good judgment and uphold the planning commission's unanimous decision and denial.

Lisa Dayton, followed by Kevin Kemp.

Good afternoon, Commissioners, and thank you for your work in our community.

My name is Lisa Dayton, and I would like my comments and exhibits entered into the record.

I would like to present to the commission my concern regarding the density calculation used in the Sierra Reflections application.

The density calculation used in the application does not meet the requirements as specified in the Truckee Meadows Regional Plan.

The developer has provided a density calculation of 1.24 dwelling units per acre using the proposed 940 dwelling units divided by the site acreage of 759.69 acres.

Per Trucking Meadows Regional Plan, this is not the correct density calculation.

Per Truckey Meadows Regional Plan, page 131.

Public facility designations and development constraint areas must first be deducted from the gross land area.

Here is that definition.

Further, definition on page 132 of the Trucking Meadows Regional Plan.

Development constraint areas include water bodies, designated FEMA zone AE floodways, and slopes greater than 30%.

The developer has provided a slope study, which has determined that 151.57 acres of the total site has a slope of greater than 30%.

This acreage has not been deducted from the maximum density calculation and represents about 20% of the site.

AE floodways.

Currently, there are no zone AE floodways on the site.

However, the stormwater drainage plan provided with the application proposes that zone AE floodways are created to increase buildable land and manage runoff.

The area of these created AE floodways should also be removed from the density calculation.

Here are the locations of the AE floodways proposed in the stormwater drainage plan included in the Sierra Reflections application.

Using these maps with legends and exhibits provided in the developer's application, you can calculate that roughly 300 acres or roughly 40% of the site is development constrained.

Page three of the developers project narrative states that the site is allowed a maximum density of 1.43 dwelling units per acre.

If you remove the constrained areas as per the Trucking Meadows Regional Plan Guidance, the proposed plan exceeds two dwelling units per acre and exceeds the allowable density.

The developer is asking to transfer density that is not achievable when you correctly remove the development constraint areas.

We ask that you please support the unanimous denial decision of the planning commission.

Thank you.

Kevin Kemp, followed by Michelle Santo.

Good afternoon, Commissioners.

My name is Kevin Kemp.

I'd like my comments and exhibits entered into the record.

I would like to present to the commission my concerns regarding the proposed density in the Sierra Reflections tentative map and the omissions of critical neighborhood design standards as outlined in the envisioned Washell 2040 master plan on pages 57 and 8 and land use designations as stated in Table 4, page 57.

The application misrepresents Sierra Flexions as primarily a suburban neighborhood.

A table of parcel sizes and setbacks is provided and then associated with the closest parcel zoning designations.

Urban neighborhoods shall have an interconnected road and bicycle network and public transit incorporated in all new development.

This does not exist.

Highway 395 is the only vehicular access to Sierra Reflections, and there is no plan to extend public transit and urban infrastructure to Pleasant Valley.

The master plan, page 57, Table 4, land use designations, provides a list of allowed zoning for the various land use types.

This table clearly states that urban parcels are not allowed in rural or suburban areas.

Therefore, I ask you please support the Planning Commission and the unanimous denial of the proposed Sierra Reflections development.

Michelle Santo, followed by Charlie Hyatt.

Good afternoon, Commissioners.

My name is Michelle Santo, and I would like my comments and exhibits entered into the record.

The developer states in their application and in their appeal that they are not requesting a zoning change.

The highest density zoning in the site is medium density suburban with a maximum of three homes per acre and minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet.

If you approve the request for a tentative subdivision map, they will map out the development with 259 urban zone parcels less than 5,000 square feet and 681 high density suburban parcels less than 12,000 square feet.

The developer is relying on Article 408, common open space development as justification to the map, the development with high density suburban, low density urban, and medium density urban parcels, despite the allowed zoning capped at medium density suburban.

Per Article 408, Section 110.408.25, the only standards where the developer has flexibility when clustering home sites on the detentative map is in respect to minimum lot width, front yard setbacks, side yard setbacks, and rear yard setbacks.

There is no provision allowing a deviation from the parcel gross area permitted by the current zoning of medium density suburban, which is 12,000 square feet per parcel.

Here is the aerial view of the closest urban neighborhood to the proposed CR Reflections urban density request.

To understand how out of place this urban neighborhood would be in Pleasant Valley, please note that you would need to travel five miles north on old US 395 towards Reno plus one mile west on Mount Rose Highway before you reach a single family neighborhood designed to medium density urban standards.

This map provides an aerial view of that five-mile drive.

Then finally pass the incorporated industrial and commercial centers.

There are no freeway on or off ramps, public transportation, grocery stores, medical or other essential services along this five-mile stretch.

This leakfrog of place in an urban neighborhood so close so far removed from essential services goes against all urban planning guidance, including your own.

Charlie Hyatt, followed by Anna Quinn.

Good afternoon, Commissioners.

My name is Charlie Hyatt, and I'd like to enter my comments and exhibits into the record.

Despite the developer's attempts to characterize this project as suburban, Sierra Reflections tentative map includes 259 urban zone parcels, of which more than 90 are patio homes with densities as high as 12 units per acre.

This is the proposed map.

The developer proposes placing these urban densities in a rural area with no public transportation, one access road, no freeway on and off ramps, no essential services within five miles.

A good gauge of where to place urban dense cities is the official walk score from walkscore.com.

While walk score is uh based on an area's reliance on personal automobiles, the higher the walk score indicates that you are closer to public transportation and essential services.

The official walk score for the proposed Sierra Reflections location is only one out of a possible 100.

Per envision 2040, page 55, the proposed Sierra Reflections location is designated as tier three.

Therefore, density cannot exceed the current designation of medium density suburban.

The plan further states that should you amend the designation to include higher density, such as urban parcels, the infrastructure to support this change would first have to be in place.

Envision 2040 page 58 states urban neighborhoods require a full range of urban services such as public sewer and water, extensive interconnected road and bicycle networks, public transportation, and safety and emergency response services.

If this appeal is approved by this commission, will you make the financial responsibility to extend urban services five miles south to an urban neighborhood in a tier three rural area?

Per the WASHO master zoning plan, the nearest patio home development, which is similar, is 9.5 miles to the north.

That plan is on the corner of South Meadows Parkway in Evergreen and averages about 11 units per acre, well into incorporated Reno's urban zone.

This is an appropriate location for an urban neighborhood.

It does offer all the required infrastructure, including being one mile or less from a uh freeway on off ramp, having four bus stops within a quarter mile radius, and is less than one half mile from shopping, banking, major medical campus, and employment centers.

All these urban amenities are of great uh excuse me.

I want to conclude that I would please request that you couple the consideration.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anna Quinn.

Thank you.

Anna Quinn followed by Claire Holland.

So if we could just like we want to make sure that we give the next person an opportunity and you can hear everything.

We want to make sure.

And I just also want to let you know that legally everything that you say during public comment is put on the record.

That could give you a couple little seconds to maybe be able to wrap up if you find the time is an issue or concern.

So thank you.

Thank you.

I'm sorry to interrupt.

Hello, Commissioners.

My name is Ann Quinn.

I'm a 15-year resident of Washoe Valley.

Please enter my comments and exhibits into the record.

Sierra Reflections application is incomplete regarding endangered species, so it cannot make the required findings for approval.

Question number 12 of the application asks if the subject property is in an area potentially containing rare or endangered species.

And if so, describe what mitigation measures will be taken to prevent adverse impacts.

The applicant answered, quote, the site is shown to contain mule deer and bear habitat, end quote.

Yet the application includes a letter from the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service stating there is a listed endangered species, a butterfly called the Carson Wandering Skipper, whose primary habitat encompasses the subject property.

This map from the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency shows that the subject property is also located within the watersheds that impact the endangered CUI and the threatened Lahantan cutthroat trout.

This is not consistent with the purpose of open space standards, Article 432.00 to preserve and protect environmentally sensitive open space areas.35 environmentally sensitive habitat in these two areas.

Number one, no new development shall be permitted within a recognized primary habitat area of an endangered species.

Number two, a habitat survey of the area shall include mitigation measures to reduce impacts and to allow for the long-term maintenance of environmentally sensitive habitats.

Since the applicant failed to include endangered andor threatened species, or describe mitigation measures to reduce impacts, the application is incomplete.

So these three findings cannot be made.

Number one, common open space development finding B, protect natural and scenic resources.

Number two, tentative subdivision map finding B, designer improvement.

Number three, tentative subdivision map finding E, fish or wildlife.

Since the above findings cannot be made, the unanimous denial decision of the Planning Commission should be upheld.

Thank you.

Claire Holland, followed by Karen Kreider.

Hello, commissioners.

My name is Claire Holland.

Please enter my comments and exhibits into the record.

Sierra Reflections application is incomplete regarding sensitive migration routes, so it cannot make the required findings for approval.

Thanks.

The application omitted a site analysis of two sensitive migration routes.

The project site is part of the Pacific Flyway, a major north-south migration route for over 350 million birds, and more than 50% of these birds are waterfowl.

Browns Creek Pond at the center of the development is an important stopover point for waterfowl during migration.

The disturbances caused by SAR reflections will disrupt their stopovers and cause many birds to avoid the pond.

This is not consistent with envisioned biodiversity goal 1.2, limit development activities that impede natural migration patterns between habitats on which migratory species depend.

The project site also encompasses a major mule deer movement corridor.

Populations of mule deer have been steadily declining for the last 30 years, and because of this, they have been identified as a species of greatest conservation need in the Nevada State Wildlife Action Plan.

Carl Lackey of Endow states that urban sprawl and the activities associated with it are the biggest challenges facing the Carson Front Mule Deer population.

The application states that ample corridor widths of 300 feet are provided along the creeks.

Yet, according to Cody Schroeder of Endow, mule deer require a minimum carter width of 1,300 feet for functional migration.

Smaller migration corridors and an increase in traffic create more chances for collisions.

Envision states that increased collisions may push the mule deer population past the point of recovery.

This does not comply with envisioned sustainability goal 2.3.

The county will encourage the location of higher density development closer to urbanized areas and support limitations on development in rural areas with high biodiversity.

Since the application omitted a site analysis of migration routes, and the development will not provide adequate migration habitats, these three findings cannot be made.

Common open space development finding B, tentative subdivision maps finding B, and tentative subdivision maps finding E.

Since these findings cannot be made, the unanimous denial decision of the Planning Commission must be upheld.

Thank you.

Karen Kreider, followed by Sandy Sullivan.

Hello, commissioners.

My name is Karen Krider.

Please enter my comments and exhibits into the record.

I'm speaking on the pollution issues CR reflections will cause in Steamboat Creek.

Due to these issues, the application cannot make the required findings for approval.

Envision Washoe 2040 appendix 4, page 48 states that Steamboat Creek is classified as the largest nonpoint source of pollution to the Truckee River.

Nonpoint source pollution is carried to lakes, rivers, and creeks in runoff from untreated stormwater from construction sites and developed areas.

This table from the 2024 Nevada Water Quality Integrated Report shows the pollution load in Steamboat Creek measured in two locations from its source.

In this span of 7.1 miles, the number of pollutants increases from four to seven.

This increase can be attributed to the creek flowing through highly developed areas where it is exposed to increasing amounts of nonpoint source pollution.

The pollution caused by serial reflections will affect the species downstream from the project, as shown in this map from the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency.

The endangered kiwi, the Carson Wandering Skipper and the threatened Lahottan Cutthroat Trout.

This increase in pollution is not consistent with the purpose of significant hydrologic resources Article 418.00 regulate development activities with and adjacent to perennial streams to ensure that these resources are protected and enhanced.

It does not comply with goal number one of the nonpoint source state management plan, reduce nonpoint source pollution in impaired waters through supportive activities that reduce pollution load.

It is also not consistent with envisioned biodiversity goal number five, appendix 4, page 21.

Protect important habitats from impacts or loss due to development.

The non-point source pollution caused by 15 to 20 years of Sierra Reflections construction and subsequent urbanization of 940 homes will damage Steamboat Creek.

Therefore, these three findings cannot be made.

Common open space development finding B protect natural and scenic resources.

Tentative subdivision maps finding B design or improvement.

Tentative subdivision maps E, fish or wildlife.

Since these findings cannot be made, the unanimous denial decision of the Planning Commission must be upheld.

Sandy Sullivan, followed by Gail Bowers.

Hello, Commissioners.

My name is Sandra Sullivan.

Please enter my comments and exhibits into the record.

I will show that Sierra Reflections application is out of compliance with a developmental code regarding tree removal and that the required findings for approval cannot be made.

The tree removal exhibit, exhibit one from the application, shows 113 of the 208 trees on the site will be removed.

These areas are shown in blue.

This equates to removing 54% of the existing trees.

Landscaping article 412.25 states that a minimum of 50% of existing significant trees must be preserved in their existing location.

Since more than 50% of the existing trees will be removed, these two findings cannot be made.

Common open space development finding B, protect natural and scenic resources, and tentative subdivision map finding B, design and implementation.

The tree removal plan does not comply with Hillside Development Article 424.40, vegetation preservation and restoration standards, which states ensure maximum preservation and restoration of existing trees and vegetation.

Since the tree removal plan does not ensure maximum tree preservation of the application, does not meet the tentative subdivision map finding B, design or implementation.

The application states that the trees to be removed are predominantly cottonwoods and willows, which are prohibited per landscaping Article 412.60 of the development code.

This is incorrect, as Article 412 states that cottonwoods are allowed in riparian areas or areas in proximity to streams and creeks.

Landscaping Article 412.25 states that existing trees not on the prohibited planter list with a caliper greater than six inches should be preserved, if feasible.

Since the tree plan since the tree removal plan is incorrect regarding the cottonwoods and larger existing plans, common open space development finding B design or improvement cannot be made.

Since the application is out of compliance with the development code and the above findings cannot be made, the unanimous denial of the decision of the planning commission must be upheld.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, commissioners.

Please enter my comments into the record.

My name is Gail Bowers.

I am the past chairperson of the Washoe Story Conservation District back when we created the Steamboat Creek Restoration Plan, which is available by contacting their office.

When this plan was created, it was unimaginable that anyone would consider destroying this critical ecological area in order to build an urban style housing development.

No development should be allowed in this highly sensitive and constrained area.

This would allow the stream and floodplain to function in the natural manner.

If the already existing beaver population is allowed to do its natural job instead of us destroying them, which is what's been happening for the last few years, the mercury will continue to become stable and will then be able to settle out into restored wetlands.

Groundwater will recharge, water quality will improve exponentially, and fisheries will reestablish, potentially becoming a much needed worldwide showcase of stream restoration.

Continuing the creek as a ditch as proposed does not clean water.

If we let nature do the job, there is no cost to the taxpayer.

Cottonwood is not a trash tree.

They provide shade for fish, bank stability, and habitat for all.

Steamboat Creek has a history of frequent flooding events.

Nine floods have been experienced since 1980.

These events are expected to occur in more severity and frequency.

The design of the proposed subdivision will destroy the steamboat creek floodplain by capping 87% of it with eight feet of fill and confined in the stream within a 300 foot wide corridor bounded by RIPRAP.

The destruction of floodplain nullifies natural flood control functions of Steamboat Creek.

It is inconsistent with Washoe County Development Code, Article 418, significant hydrologic resources, Section 110.418.00, which states the intent of these regulations is to protect the health, safety, and welfare by A, preserving, protecting, and restoring the natural functions of existing perennial streams in Washoe County.

C, ensuring the natural flood control functions of perennial streams, including stormwater retention and slow release capabilities are maintained.

E, ensuring the natural water quality functions of perennial streams, including pollution filtering, nutrient recycling, and sediment filtering capabilities are not impacted by proposed developments, and H ensuring no net loss of value, acreage, and function of significant hydrologic resources.

For these reasons, Wachau County Development Code, Article 608, tentative subdivisions of map, Section 110.608.25 findings B design or improvement and F public health cannot be made.

The proposed development is on a floodplain.

Disconnecting and constricting Steamboat Creek will increase water depth and velocity in the channel and increase the rogue erosive action during flood flows.

This violates envision Washo 2040 AR Principle 1, Policy 1.2 restrict development of floodplains that would constrict or otherwise result in higher flood waters or peak flows or impact of floodplain functions.

Washoe County Development Code Article 608, Section 110.608.25 findings design and improvement and type of development cannot be made.

The flushing of pollutants and contaminated sediment caused by increased floodwater erosion will have a negative impact.

Um, as well as statute under statutes under the Nevada NRS Code 534 pertaining to water rights.

A uh the proposed removal of natural stream and wetland areas, which are in direct surface water connection with jurisdictional waters of the United States will adversely impact natural capacity of the local watershed to attenuate floods.

It will significantly reduce natural infiltration and recharge to the local groundwater system, thereby likely to cause impacts on log on local wells and water resources.

It will reduce existing ability of steamboat creek to attenuate contaminants, including the mercury during construction as well as years following.

This violates Washoe County Development Code Article 418, significant hydrologic resources, section 110 418-0.

B the stormwater management systems that are proposed are inadequate.

They provide vastly less storage capacity to retain floods.

They reduce the amount of water available to recharge to the local groundwater system regulated under NRS 533-0055 and potentially cause impacts to local water wells and induce evaporation loss related to water stored in the ponds and the stormwater infrastructure, which would impact the project consumptive use water rights allocation, which is regulated under NRS 533.028.

Based on these findings, we uh are recommended.

I recommend the D the denial of the application for the proposed Sierra Reflections subdivision.

Thank you.

Tim Sallier, followed by Marilyn Naylor.

Good afternoon.

Hello, Commissioners.

My name is Tim Salier.

Please include my comments in the record.

I'm speaking to you regarding the traffic issues related to the proposed Sierra Reflection Project.

First, the N DOT approval of the traffic analysis is over one year old and is out of date.

The proposed development will add approximately 6,000 to 8,000 vehicles per day with an average round trip of at least 820 miles.

This does not include service vehicles brought in by others.

Old US 395 is already considered a dangerous highway with reduced speed limit due to a history of traffic accidents and wildlife encounters.

The proposed roundabouts are a major concern.

The roundabouts are inconsistent with the rural and scenic nature of the area as stated in the vision and character statements of the Washoe County Master Plan.

The roundabouts are of inadequate size.

They are specified to have 180 feet diameter.

A tractor telling a single 57-foot trailer would have to use the apron to navigate this size roundabout.

It's too small to safely handle larger rigs with two to three trailers being diverted off the I 580 in emergency situations.

This would be low speed roundabouts.

The grades approaching them would cause vehicles to lose traction during winter weather and slowing to approach them or slowing to stopping for conflicting traffic.

There are no bicycle lanes.

Recent fatalities have highlighted this need.

There are no separate exit and merge lanes.

All vehicles enter the roundabout.

This results in reduced capacity in emergency situations.

Both roundabouts on the old 395 east of the proposed subdivision are only one half mile apart.

Use of both could be lost in extreme fire events, such as what happened in Washoe Valley Fire in 2012 and nearly happened in the recent Davis Creek fire.

Specifically the Pagney Lane roundabout.

This is a low area with frequently floods and becomes impassable during heavy rain events.

Specifically for the East Lake Roundabout space constraints due to location at the top of the hill and surrounding terrain, make the building of a roundabout with the required line of sight distances impossible without destroying the entire area.

This would be in conflict conflict with the Hillside Development Article 424 and the corridor management plan for the Washa Valley Scenic Byway.

For the above reasons, findings B design or improvement, F public health, H access cannot be made, and the tentative subdivision map cannot be approved.

Thank you.

Marilyn Naylor, followed by Erica Broomer.

My name is Marilyn Naylor.

Please include my comments and exhibits into the record.

I'm one of the community members who joined forces with Washoe County Parks, Scenic Nevada, and Washoe Valley Alliance to complete the application for the Washoe Valley Scenic Byway, designated by the state of Nevada in 2010.

The Byway Corridor Management Plan, completed by Washoe County in 2013, is incorporated into Envision Washa 2040.

As such, it cannot be ignored or removed without proper public process.

NRS 278-210.

The corridor management plan identifies managing partners, seven federal, state, and local government agencies and community organizations with a mission to enhance Nevada's rural heritage and provide opportunities to experience the scenic beauty, cultural history, natural resources, and recreation.

Envision Washoe 2040, NCR Principle 1, collaborate with all planning partners to identify and protect the region's significant visual gateways and viewsheds, including ridgelines.

Not all of the managing partners are on the notification list of reviewing agencies who were sent an application to review and evaluate.

And despite the applicant receiving documents about the scenic byway at neighborhood meetings, the application does not address the byway.

A roundabout is proposed at the intersection of Highway 395 and East Lake Boulevard, which is the gateway for Washoe Valley Scenic Byway.

A roundabout would require complete removal of the hillside, eliminating its ridgeline bordering highway 395 to the west.

This ridgeline fits the significant ridgeline definition in the Trucking Meadows Regional Plan in an area of significant ecological, historical, and cultural importance with visional dominance characterized by silhouetting appearance against the sky.

Its removal would destroy the scenic quality and viewshed forever.

In Vision Washo 2040 NR6, local government master plans shall include policies that address visual impact of development on ridgeline to maintain the scenic value of the region.

Washoe County Development Code, Article 110, 424.

Significant natural features shall be protected and preserved where appropriate and feasible, including ridgelines.

The corridor management plan, avoid mass grading and large rock cuts visible from the highway.

Findings section 110608 cannot be made.

Please uphold the unanimous vote of the Planning Commission and deny this application.

On a positive note, we were recently awarded an America 250 Travel Nevada grant for an online interactive regional maps connecting our local, national, state, and county scenic byways, which does include historic scenic old highway 395 south through Steamboat and Pleasant Valley.

This does meet a goal of the quarter management plan, page 81.

Thank you.

Erica Brumer, followed by Cameron McSweeney.

Can you just hello, my name is Erica Bremer, and I'm here to speak about the school and traffic impacts associated associated with the Sierra Reflections development.

Please enter my comments and exhibits into record.

First, I want to address item number eight of the traffic impact report requirements, which states that a report is needed when a development may generate 80 or more weekday peak hour trips.

In the applications traffic traffic volumes section, the original traffic study collected turning movement counts near Pawnee Lane and Highway 395 between 7 o'clock and 9 o'clock a.m.

and 4 o'clock and 6 o'clock p.m.

on mid-weekdays while schools were in session.

However, these time periods do not align with Pleasant Valley Elementary School's actual peak traffic times.

School begins at 9 30 a.m.

with peak traffic between 9.05 and 925, and dismissal at 3.30 p.m.

with peak traffic between 325 and 345.

During these times, cars back up for up to 20 minutes at the Pawnee Lane exit.

Because the traffic study did not measure during these true peak windows, the data does not accurately represent school-related traffic, and any projections based on inaccurate baseline counts needs to be reconsidered.

Second, in reference to the safe routes to school tentative map, despite minor proposed improvements by the Sierra Reflections Development and Washoe County School District, pedestrian safety along Kitts Way, the direct walkway to Pleasant Valley Elementary School remains a major concern.

WCSD noted that with little to no designated school parking, parents currently must park on both sides of the road, leaving students to walk in the roadway due to the lack of shoulders or sidewalks.

With the added traffic expected from the Sierra Reflections development, these risks will only increase.

Even though the safe routes to school measures include three painted crosswalks, three flashing signs, and a sidewalk along Pawnee Lane, there's no safe path along Kitts Way to the school, leaving children exposed to vehicle traffic.

For the projected enrollment of 62 elementary students, these partial measures are not enough to ensure safe continuous pedestrian access in a critical school area.

Due to the inaccurate count of traffic volumes and minor traffic adjustments, please consider denying this application.

Cameron McSweeney, followed by Linda Bell.

Share again that I realize that this is we've all been here and we all really want to appreciate everybody's comments and respect everyone.

So I am going to just also share that I'm probably going to hear a few more, and then we're going to take a break just for uh a quick like 10-minute break and then come back.

So I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I just wanted to let you know and thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

Please enter my comments and exhibits into the record.

My name is Cameron McSweeney, and I'm a Reno resident of 45 years growing up in Lemon Valley, now residing in Pleasant Valley and currently the vice president of the Pleasant Steamboat Valley Landowners Association.

I am also on the insurance advisory board for the Nevada Division of Insurance and licensed in seven states and have 25 years in the insurance industry, giving me decades of knowledge pertaining to homeowners insurance and our current insurance climate.

To put it plainly, we have been still are and will continue to be in a home insurance crisis for quite some time, possibly even decades.

At the January 6, 2026 hearing, Ken Crater, who does not hold a Nevada property and casualty insurance or Nevada property and casualty law license, claimed that his proposed development would be easy to find insurance for due to them being outfitted with fire-resistant materials and vents that prohibit embers from entering the residences.

Mr.

Crater is violating NRS 683A and 683C.

As what he is doing is constitutes a solicitation or negotiation of insurance from an unlicensed person and can be fined up to a thousand dollars.

I want to make it crystal clear.

The insurance companies do not take into consideration those types of fire resistant measures when deciding whether or not to insure a home.

And now AB 376 allows them to completely exclude wildfire coverage.

My brokerage has over has access to over 100 home insurance carriers, and not one of them acknowledges the new fire-resistant venting systems, such as Vulcan or Brand Guard events.

There is no way to indicate updated or newer fire resistant options, nor are there underwriting exceptions for them.

The insurance companies solely look at the distance a fire station is from homes where the hydrants are and mostly the surrounding vegetation and oversaturation of homes.

Even if a new fire station is built and fire hydrants installed, the insurance companies will still deem it too much of a risk to be able to ensure the homeowners of Pleasant and Washoe Valley due to the vast surrounding vegetation, thus compounding the oversaturation of homes with the few carriers that are still writing insurance in this area.

These photos prove that even brick and steel buildings will be a total loss in the event of wildfire and carriers know this.

These buildings were all lost in the Davis Fire, September 2024.

Due to the above-mentioned issues, the CR reflections developer is unable to make the findings under Article 608, tentative subdivision map, Section B, design or improvement, and F public health.

If this development is allowed, it will cause detrimental consequences for the homeowners who are already in this insurance crisis.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Linda Bell, followed by Tom Johnson.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Thank you.

So my name is Linda Bell, and I've lived in the Washoe Valley for the past 30 years.

And I served as a 911 dispatcher for the city of Sparks.

Please enter my comments and existence into your records.

Public safety was the most important reason for the Washoe County Planning Commission's unanimous denial of the proposed Sierra Elections development.

The South Valleys area currently only accounts for about 22% of the allocated resources of fire, EMS, and law enforcement calls.

With an anticipated influx of 940 high-density urban-style homes, increasing the population by up to 3,000 plus people in a rural area.

There are serious concerns regarding the timely availability of these important emergency resources.

After speaking with representatives from Chucky Meadow Fire Protection District, Remsa and the Washoe County Sheriff's Office, it's clear that the current focus of expanding these services is now concentrated north of Reno.

This is very concerning because approval of this proposed development will put even more stress on these agencies' resources, which are already maxed out.

Thus, the approval of this project does not meet the findings at Section 110.608.25 Section B, designer improvement.

Important note the Washoe County Sheriff's Office did not respond as indicated in the Planning Commission's reviewing agencies report.

Previously, funding was allocated for a new consolidated fire station in Washoe Valley to better serve all the area, but the funding was withdrawn and used elsewhere.

Help exploring funding for this much needed new fire station is noted by Truckee Meadows Fire Protection District as a condition for approval of this project.

Fire station number 32 in East Washoe Valley currently only has two fire engines, one ambulance serving over 41 square miles in the South Valleys, resulting in increased response times, especially to incidents in West Washa Valley.

Remsa said they may back up fire, providing they have adequate personnel to station in that area.

The Sheriff's Office emergency response was inadequate during the 2024 during this creek fire, in which it took the Washoe Valley residents over two hours to evacuate.

One half hour longer than the 2016 Little Valley fire.

Many residents, especially those with large animals, chose not to evacuate for fear their families or large animals could have been trapped in traffic jams.

If the winds had shifted in either of the two previous fires, people and animals would have been trapped in a fire storm with catastrophic results.

Adding 3,000 plus more evacuees would add unnecessary chaos to an already difficult situation.

Based on the lack of unavailability of these emergency services and anticipated increased response times, the unanimous denial of the Washoe County Planning Commission must be upheld to protect the citizens of the South Valleys.

Thank you for considering my comments.

Thank you.

Tom Johnson.

We have one more.

And I know that everyone appreciates that we're going to hear this next uh public commenter.

Then we're going to take a break, and we're going to again be respectful of any type of acknowledgement other than our deepest silent appreciation.

Thank you.

For point of reference, an acre foot of water is 300.

Can you identify yourself really quick?

And can you start as time, Tom Johnson?

Thank you.

I just didn't see that.

Thank you.

1993, Tumla drilled two wells in St.

James Village to provide water for the development.

These two wells originally were rated for 715 gallons per minute.

Subsequently, they were derated down to 175 gallons per minute.

In 2018, there was a test pump at the Balkan Capital well near the chocolate nugget factory above 580.

In 10 days of pumping, they managed to drop the water a little more than 100 feet.

According to the Tumwall website, the average annual usage per individual is 60,615 gallons.

So then 940 dwellings is put two and a half people per dwelling.

That's 142,445,250 gallons or 452 acre feet of water.

We've got 81 units of St.

James still to be developed.

That's another 40 acre feet of water.

According to the U.S.

Geological Survey and the Nevada Department of Water Resource Pleasant Valley is already drawing 2,770 acre feet per year.

The sustainable drawdown is approximately 3,000 acre feet per year.

This is as of 2022 with the latest available.

The Nevada Department of Water Resources already shows it as fully pumped and overallocated.

The same source shows Washoe Valley Alcofore as fully appropriated.

Planning Commission policy is not approved in any development that would negatively impact adjacent properties.

Quoting from Tomewall's work order 24-0013, page five.

Despite the existing demand being a fraction of the rate of well capacity, the static water levels in the two St.

James Village wells have been declining since the well first installed.

Water supplies causes hardships on municipal and domestic ball owners sustainability of water supplies previously committed for service.

And we're conflicting with existing water rights.

Can we can we start?

Kate, can you grant Kelly?

Don't burn you.

You look so dapper.

I'm sorry.

Oh, thank you.

You're very kind.

But you're looking dapper.

Woo!

I'm gonna put you on the dapper list.

I'm gonna call the meeting back to order at three thirty-four.

Elaine Martin, followed by Bill Neiler.

My presentation is on the Surpa Well puppy test report, which is part of the share reflections application.

The well tested is called the Falcon Capital Well.

Although not stated, the inclusion of the report indicates that the well is being considered as a possible source of water for Sherrow reflections.

Temble production wells, which serve customers in the old Washhoe City area are shown by nearby blue dots.

The well test pumped 406 gallons a minute for 10 consecutive days.

The test showed a measurable drawdown of Tumwalt production wells.

The recharge at these wells was slow, only being in the 70% range after 14 days.

The water temperature of the Falcon Capital well was about 70 degrees as compared to the normal temperature of 50 to 55.

This indicates that the well is close to the steamboat springs fault line.

Seismic activity could affect the well's performance.

To meet proposed pumping levels, a larger well, which could pump 800 gallons a minute or 1,290 acre feet per year would be required.

This is 2.7 times the permitted amount for the current well.

Simulation estimated that a pumping rate of 800 gallons a minute for five years would lower the groundwater level by over 20 feet for up to one mile from the well.

This would degrade existing domestic wells and could cause shallow wells to collapse.