Good morning.

It's July 14th at 10 a.m.

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

Thank you all for being here.

We'll go ahead and move to item one, which is the salute to the flag.

And you know, Mr.

Brooks, we're starting a pattern here, so I'm gonna have you do the Pledge of Allegiance, please.

And to the Republic, which it stands one nation under God immobility and justice problem.

Thank you.

We'll move now to roll call, please.

Chair Andreola, present.

Vice Chair Garcia.

Here.

Commissioner Hill.

Here.

Commissioner Clark is absent.

Commissioner Herman.

On the phone.

Here.

Thank you.

Uh County Manager Kate Thomas.

Deputy DA Jennifer Gustafson.

Present.

And I'm Jan Galicini, your county clerk.

Madam, you have a quorum.

Thank you.

We are going to move uh item.

If there's a couple things I'd like to just be really clear on the agenda so everyone can follow.

We're gonna pull item 14.

Staff is looking at um getting additional information.

It'll be brought back at a later time.

So item 14 is pulled.

And what we're gonna do is we're gonna move the block vote till after item 10.

So thank you.

All right, we'll move now to item three, manager Thomas.

Thank you.

This morning we are joined by Pastor Craig from Convo Church to lead us in an invitation.

Good morning, Chair Andreola, Commissioners.

Thank you for the opportunity.

Let's bow our heads in prayer.

Heavenly Father, creator of the heavens and earth.

We come before you this morning, not out of ritual, but of desperate necessity.

We we present ourselves before you with humble hearts.

We recognize you, O God, as the only one true God, and that we are your creation, your servants, your children, created to know you, to have personal relationship with you and call to steward the affairs of this world with honesty, integrity, and wisdom.

We acknowledge the truth, the power and the authority of your holy word, which has formed guided this great nation from its inception through these 250 years.

We have seen greatness in our nation and we have seen the fruit of our sin and shortcomings.

And I prayed that that today, not just in this meeting, but across our great nation, that we would return to the words you spoke to King Solomon as he was installed as king over Israel, recorded in 2 Chronicles 7 14.

If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sins and restore their land.

This morning I bring before you these leaders who serve Washoe County as commissioners, and I pray that they humbly seek your face and that they would pursue the knowledge, understanding, and wisdom that from you alone is what is needed to govern in the capacity to which you have called them for such a time as this.

And we thank you, Lord, as they serve.

Thank you for them serving our community.

And we acknowledge that there is evil in our land, and your word reveals that there is a kingdom that desires to destroy what is from you.

But by the name of our only Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, we find forgiveness.

We find restoration, salvation, life, and purpose.

And so we cancel any assignment of the enemy that would bring anything evil against our servants as they serve you and as they serve the people of this county.

This nation belongs to you, Jesus, and the state belongs to you.

This county belongs to you.

And the authority that you have given to these public servants gift, and I pray your Holy Spirit helps them to steward that fragile gift in all that they do.

We humbly ask this today in the name of our Savior, Jesus Christ.

Amen.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We'll now close item three and move to item four.

Manager Thomas.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

This is public comment, and comment heard under this item will be limited to three minutes per person.

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.

First up, we have Terry Brooks, followed by Cynthia Cooper.

Good morning.

It's me, Terry Brooks again.

And today I'm sharing my presentation about different cultures as victims of discrimination.

We all live in a melting pot of a variety of cultures, and there are a lot of differences among those many cultures.

By pointing at one other person, you cannot judge their entire culture because no one person can fully represent an entire culture.

There are a lot of different cultures that live all over our nation, and different cultures seem to have different ways of communication.

Some cultures do not address each other by their names, but they address each other by their titles instead of their names.

In some cultures, the people like to stand a lot closer to each other, but in other cultures, the people like to stand further from each other.

In some cultures, people deal directly with conflicts with each other, but in other cultures, people try to avoid dealing with conflicts with each other.

Some focus more on the group more than an individual as a way of trying to avoid conflict with other individuals.

In some areas, housing is inhabited mostly by people of the same culture.

In some of those areas, there is discrimination against any other culture.

Some cultures really value receiving an education more than some other cultures value education.

Some employers discriminate against other cultures, while some employers value diversity and welcome several cultures.

Some politicians try to value the characteristics of diverse culture, but others discriminated against anyone of a different culture.

When people of different cultures refuse to accept each other, no one benefits.

But when they listen and learn from each other, everyone benefits.

Thank you.

Cynthia Cooper, followed by Jeff Church.

Good morning, Commissioners.

I'm Cynthia Cooper.

I'd like to comment on item nine, choosing the next library board member.

Commissioners, I admire the ambition of the uh library director, Ms.

McClure.

Uh her vision is that all Washoe County third graders will be reading at third grade level.

That's when they transition from learning to read to reading to learn.

Nothing motivates learning better than curiosity.

And for that, the library is a valuable resource.

But not just because there are books on whatever subject that could be accessible to any child here, but also because they hold events that are stimulating and educational, like uh the talks of the wildlife biologist, you know, Phil Harmonic, they have craft workshops, steam workshops, and so on.

What the library also does well and must continue to do is they actively ensure that the materials in the library represent all the identities throughout Washoe County.

Why is this important?

What's that got to do with the literacy rate of Washoe third graders?

Relevance.

Children and adults pay more attention when they see a connection to the stories they hear, the list history lessons being taught, uh, when they see a connection to role models.

Ms.

McClure has uh noted that there are discrepancies in literacy rates between different communities of different socioeconomic levels.

To mitigate for this, I think the library and the school district should collaborate and uh issue a library card to every child being registered to attend a public school.

Commissioners, I urge you to appoint a the next library board member who will defend the valuable principles and practices the library has established that makes sure that the library materials are accessible and relevant to each and every one of us residents in Washoe County.

And I wish the library and Ms.

McClure the best of luck in achieving widespread literacy throughout Washoe County.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Jeff Church, followed by Jane Fox.

Good morning.

My name is Jeff Church.

I run a website, RenoTaxRebolt.com.

Uh, I want to address the RTC5 gas increase that occurred lately or recently.

I also want to address the uh ballot measure uh WC1.

I don't have time for that today, so I'm just gonna put it on the record in writing.

Regarding RTC51, RTC five, the measure as intended by the Board of County Commissioners and the legislature was implemented with a layered system of checks and balances as required by law and due process.

I strongly believe that all three main layers were ignored, not followed, and the formula used was inaccurate.

Cutting to the chase, we need the DMV or taxation to review the RTC calculations for compliance and accuracy.

Not too much to ask.

We need an expedited outside legal opinion as well.

I recently met approximately two weeks ago with the RTC staff attorney openly and candidly went over all these issues.

To date, I have not received any response to lead me to believe that I am wrong.

As part of the system of independent oversight, Washoe County Code 20 requires that the calculations be done by the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles under contract to the county.

It's right there, you can read it.

Those calculations were never done.

I have it in writing from DMV, they were never done.

Nevada revised statute requires the calculations be submitted in a public meeting to the RTC board to verify the accuracy and forward data suggesting the increase to you, the county commissioners.

From inception till 2022, that was done.

However, that then stopped, and to date it has not been done.

There is no evidence that the required increase was ever submitted to you.

If it was, it would be on the agenda.

Further, the formula for calculations is set code set in Washoe County Code 20.

That formula appears to not have been followed.

The backroom formula by the RTC is inconsistent with the required formula, and if true, maybe void.

We had a system of checks and balances, and had it been followed, I would not be here today.

Well, I'd prefer to wait for the arrival of the new district attorney in January.

This objection to the RTC5 tax must be addressed now.

I suggest again the first step is having the formula reviewed by the DMV or taxation, especially DMV is required by law.

And the next step is a expedited legal opinion.

To summarize again, we need an outside opinion.

We need an examination of this to see if the law was followed.

And once again, I do object to the ballot measure, EV WC1.

I'll put that on the record as well.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Jane Fox, followed by Donna Dawson Schwartz.

Good morning, Commissioners.

For the record, my name is Jane Fox, and I lead the UNR Street Reach Project.

I'm here today with members of our team.

Uh, to uh sincerely express our gratitude for the interlocal agreement between Washoe County and our UNR Street Reach project.

This agreement really represents a commitment to advance our shared goals in serving individuals who are unhoused in our community.

Specifically, StreetReach will now be able to actively use the HMIS system to communicate with local housing and service providers.

We will be able now to provide bloodborne virus testing, wound care, and nursing assessments inside of the CARES campus at the resource center and in the safe camp.

We will be able to share aggregate non-identifiable data on linkages to community services, and somewhat most importantly, we will continue our joint work together to collaborate in problem solving related to barriers to care and access.

We deeply appreciate your support and your trust in our team and the work that we're doing.

This partnership is a key foundational step in our joint investment to serve the county's unhoused population with compassion with dignity and the services that they need to move forward, both in health and in well being.

So again, thank you so much.

Thank you.

Donna Dawson Schwartz, followed by Maureen McElroy.

My name is Donna Dawson Schwartz.

Good morning, Madam Chairman and members of the Commission.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you again about why I would like to be on the Washoe County Library Board of Trustees.

After retiring from a 32-year career as a high school English teacher, I've had the opportunity to reflect on the people and the institutions that made my students' success possible.

Without question, our libraries were among the most valuable educational partners I had.

Throughout my teaching career, I relied on both our school and public libraries to support student learning.

Many of my assignments required students to conduct research, evaluate sources, and develop critical reading thinking skills.

Those projects often began in our school library, where I worked closely with our librarian to make sure that students had access to the resources they needed and learned the research strategies that would serve them throughout their lives.

From there, students expanded their learning by using our public libraries.

There, they discovered additional books, databases, and other resources that help them deepen their understanding of the topics they were studying.

More importantly, they learned that libraries are places of lifelong learning, not simply places to complete a school assignment.

Throughout my career, I developed a deep appreciation for the role libraries play in our community.

They provide equal access to information, technology, educational opportunities, and welcoming spaces for people of every age and background.

They help develop curiosity, literacy, and inform citizens, which are all beneficial to our community.

Now that I'm retired from the classroom, I'm looking for meaningful ways to continue serving our community.

I believe my experience working with librarians, supporting student research, and seeing firsthand the impact libraries have on individuals and families, will help make me an effective member of the library board of trustees.

If selected, I would demonstrate my commitment to ensuring that our libraries continue to meet the ever-changing needs of our community.

Thank you for your time, your service to our county, and your consideration.

Maureen McElroy, followed by Alana Fitzgerald.

Good morning, Chair Andreola and Commissioners.

My name is Maureen McElroy for the record.

I'm addressing you this morning regarding agenda item number nine, which is the recommendation to appoint one candidate to fill one midterm vacancy on the Washoe County Library Board of Trustees.

This morning affords an unexpected positive opportunity for our Washoe County Library S and the community it serves.

How fortunate that you again have this moment to select someone who will enhance our library board, someone who will engage in a beneficial manner, work towards bettering our library system, support our hardworking library staff, and defend the rights of all of our community members for free access to all the vast resources our system has to offer.

My request to you in making this decision is that you not focus just on what district the applicant resides in, but on the essential qualities that will make them an exemplary board member, qualities such as passion for community involvement, true interest in a volunteer experience, experience in working with public libraries, and a demonstrated use and appreciation of libraries.

Thank you all for all of your hard work.

So appreciated, and thank you for this opportunity to comment.

Thank you.

Alana Fitzgerald, followed by Wendy Leonard.

Good morning, Alana Fitzgerald, for the record, and I apologize a little bit of crossover with what the previous person just covered.

Good morning, Chair Andreola and Vice Chair Garcia and Commissioners.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

I'm a constituent in District One and I'm thankful to my commissioner and all of you for the work you do.

With the new and unexpected opening on the Library Board of Trustees, I would like to thank you for the pre-screening that you did before the votes and choices made for the two newest trustees that were placed.

I hope that the same parameters previously suggested would be applied, and just highlighting a couple, having a person who has a record of being engaged with their libraries here in Washoe County, a person who has had previous board experience and who is willing to engage in training specific to the unique situation with the county's oversight and provision of human resources and budget work.

And lastly, a person who is not using a personal or political agenda to create chaos for our library system.

Sadly, we have been over the over the last couple of years, we've seen just how one trustee, one, who appears to have been driven by an agenda to devalue the needs of some members of our community, can create challenges for the system, the board, and ultimately the members of our community.

The existing accounty strategic plan under the fourth basic focus area, innovative services, emphasizes ensuring equitable services, equitable access to services, and having a trustee or trustees who try to inject a personal agenda into board decisions, is operating in opposition to this.

Also, NRS 379.002 says it is the goal of the state's publicly supported libraries and information centers to provide the resources and train staff to meet the information needs of all citizens.

So again, I ask you to please keep the suggestions in mind as you make your selection.

And thank you very much.

I do truly appreciate all that you do and all that the employees of the county do for us every day.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Wendy Leonard, followed by Ilya Arbatman.

Good morning, Commission and members of the public.

I'm here to speak regarding topic number eight, an appointment to the planning commission for the at large north of the river position for the planning commission.

My name is Wendy Leonard.

I'm a retired lieutenant from Washoe County Sheriff's Office.

I spent my entire adult career reading, interpreting, and learning to apply the laws in the best interest of the public and mitigating risks to the county.

As a manager in the sheriff's office, it was vital to understand how laws impacted the risks and the risks to the county and to the public.

After my retirement 10 years ago, I served as a union representative.

During that time, I learned that it's often common that the concerns of the community go unheard.

And it seems like the community feels like when they present themselves to a board, they're not paid attention to.

I currently have no further political aspirations.

I'm asking for your consideration to appointment of planning commission.

And just wanted to share with you that my strong legal framework is going to be a benefit to the commission as a whole in regards to working with our within our management plan.

And I thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Elia Arbatman, followed by Eileen Eklund.

Morning.

My name is Ilya Arbabin.

I'm speaking to an item nine as representative of Freedom to Read Nevada.

We are a volunteer organization of community members who came together to support our library system, which has become a local example of a national trend of public and school libraries turning into battlegrounds for our ongoing culture war.

We want this to stop.

As we have seen, the Library Board of Trustees has a critical role in navigating threats to the library system.

The board can either nurture and enable these threats or it can shut them down.

You have before you an excellent pool of applicants for the vacant board seat.

I'm up here to flag Denise Meyer as absolutely the wrong choice for this position, unless we want more of the same antagonism, agitation, and chaos that I'm sure everyone here is very eager to put behind them.

To be clear, I'm only raising concern about this candidate in particular because she was the runner-up during the last round of appointments.

Her extremely weep weak application, and I have it here with some of the highlighted areas, does not meet or even respond to the criteria outlined by county staff, which is here.

It contains only an exactly five sentences that explain neither her fitness for nor her interest in the role.

Many of the applications go into inspired detail about their love of libraries, their backgrounds, the reasons for putting themselves forward, complete with cover letters and even letters of recommendation.

Denise Meyer does not attend library board meetings or do anything else to my knowledge to attest to her investment in a thriving library system.

County staff puts many work hours, which means taxpayer money, into outlining and conducting a thorough candidate search with specific recommendations.

Please do honor that by selecting the best candidate according to your own criteria and process.

There are many to choose from, who actually meet these criteria and put in the work to deserve appointment.

Finally, I'm disheartened to bring this forth during public comment, but unfortunately, I think it is necessary to paint an accurate picture of the circles Denise Meyer operates in and what kind of rhetoric and dirty politics we would be inviting into the library system with her appointment.

Denise Meyer's unsuccessful run for county commission was enabled by Robert Beatles, who is the primary funder of her campaign.

Some of the uh CE reports here.

Meyer's campaign regularly sent out offensive, unacceptable text messages attacking Commissioner Garcia.

I received many of these texts myself because I live in District Three.

It's not appropriate to read them here, but you can find them on one of Beatles' websites, uh, Operation Sunlight.

More of that.

The language of these vulgar attacks alone and the fact that Denise Meyer thought that they were appropriate to send out en masse, regardless of their target, already disqualifies her from holding any respectable position.

Given, however, that they were directly targeting a member of the same board that would be overseeing her were she to become a trustee.

It seems glaringly obvious that she is not the right choice for this position.

Please save us the heartache and turmoil, sure to follow the appointment of another unqualified trustee who is volatile and aligned with self-proclaimed political operatives who function via disruption and chaos, and who's likely interested in the library only to augment her own political influence.

As uh Alana Fitzgerald says, the pre-screening question number three would disqualify Denise Meyer, who has twice at least run for she's run for counsel and commission and failed.

So we can only assume that seeking appointment is another way into politics.

Do not appoint Denise Meyer.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Eileen Eklund, followed by Bree Schmidt.

Good morning, Commissioners.

My name is Eileen Eklund, and for the record, and I live in Sparks.

Thank you once again for the opportunity to speak.

And of course, I too am going to talk about item nine, the library Washoe County Library Board trustee.

Today you'll be voting to replace a trustee, and I congratulate you on having an impressive pool of candidates to choose from.

I'm here to ask you to appoint someone who truly understands and loves libraries.

Someone who understands the critical role they play in promoting literacy and a lifelong love of reading and learning in our young people.

Someone who understands how our library staff works with local schools and educators to improve opportunities and outcomes for all our youth.

Someone who understands that libraries are also critical sources of information, education, training and connection for everyone in our community, especially in this digital age.

Someone who knows how important it is for every library branch to be attuned to the needs of the community it serves, from toddlers to seniors and everyone in between, and to be an inclusive and welcoming space for everyone who enters its doors.

Over the last few years, I've heard people say that libraries are no longer necessary because, quote, I have a library here in my pocket.

I've heard people say that they think libraries suffer from mission creep and should just stick to loaning out books.

I've heard people that imply that our libraries are in some way broken because they welcome everyone who comes through their doors, no matter who they are, what they believe, or how much money they have.

Our libraries aren't broken.

They're one of the last free egalitarian community spaces we have.

And in today's fragmented and contentious society, they're more important than ever.

I'm here to ask you to appoint someone who will be a titless advocate for that vision of what our libraries can and should be.

That doesn't mean keeping libraries exactly as they are.

Of course, any institution needs to keep learning and growing, reshaping itself in response to changes in community needs and desires.

But our library staff is fully equipped to do this.

They're smart, they're committed, and they're deeply engaged and in tune with the communities they serve throughout Washoe County.

We need to trust and support this excellent staff and choose trustees who love value and support our libraries.

Trustees who will be enthusiastic and dedicated advocates for the libraries we will need for our future.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Bree Schmidt, followed by Penny Brock.

Good morning, commissioners.

My name is Brie Schmidt.

I'm a local advocate and activist here in Reno, and I just want to speak to the library board appointees.

I'm just going to ditto what most of the people have said already.

We're looking for somebody on the library board who is able to steadfastly defend the library as an institution of First Amendment rights.

It's really one of the few protected places for free speech, for free communication and the freedom of knowledge, and as well as the freedom to read.

It's really important.

I think everybody in this room can agree on the value of the freedom to read.

And with that, I will just share with you a library joke.

Libraries are taller than people think because they have so many stories.

Thank you so much.

Penny Brock, followed by Steve Malone.

Penny Brock for the record.

I'm here to talk about election integrity, of course.

When you took your oath of office to become commissioners, you swore to uphold the Constitution, which includes the Bill of Rights.

You, our elected officials.

Why am I saying that?

Because on the agenda, 6A1 is the road to the 26th presentation by our ROV.

His presentation, I have to assume will be a PowerPoint.

It was not as an attachment to the agenda.

Number two, this should have allowed for public comment, which it did not.

The other item is 7F1, which is in a block vote.

I would ask that that be pulled out separately because it deals again with our elections.

Voter observers have asked for more cameras and monitors in the current mail ballot processing room for the 2026 election to assist in meaningful observation as required by federal and state law.

These additional cameras and monitors could be moved to the new facility.

When we ask George Guthrie why there were not more cameras as needed in the current mail ballot processing room, he said because they didn't have enough money.

Well, in the budget that you approved in May, you gave the ROV 3.4 million dollars for house election operations, furniture, personnel, and storage.

So therefore, it looks like it's an open checkbook for our elections department manager.

Under House Elections Operations, he could use some of that fund to buy, I estimate about seven cameras that are needed currently in this mail ballot processing room.

And the monitors, I don't know, maybe four more monitors to pick up the six cameras.

But this is a very important right.

This is an obstruction.

This is lack of transparency, and it disenfranchises the observers from doing what we have the right to do.

Therefore, I would ask that the consideration be given for you to encourage the ROV manager to put more cameras in the mail ballot processing room for transparency.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Steve Malone, followed by Nicholas St.

John.

Hi, my name's Steve Malone.

I'm a retired union operator, native Nevadan, been here 30 working in this town for 38 years.

I'm 58 years old.

I'm here to comment about what was said at the Citizens Advisory Board meeting.

And it's about the food trucks, and it's about taking this Sun Valley Drive away from the state of Nevada for Washoe County.

I've been a washer out in Sun Valley for 56 years.

If you think the Washoe County is going to take care of the people of Sun Valley better than the state does, you're wrong.

And the reasoning up at the Citizen Advisory Board meeting was the snow plows.

Your snow plows are their dispatch priority.

No matter where you are, Sun Valley's last on the list.

Always has been.

And I want to remind you people what Washoe County did to us back when Obama was in office.

They closed our pool, they closed our park, they turned it over to Sun Valley GID, and they go out and charge us $350 a month recreational fee to keep the pool and park open while we're still paying the county the same money that we were paying when they were supposed to run it.

The problems in Sun Valley isn't Sun Valley Drive from there to seventh.

It's from 7th to Pyramid Highway.

That's what needs to be addressed.

And the county did that about five, six years ago.

Go out there and take a look at it.

Go take a look at their artwork and stuff that they put up that you can't even see because of the weeds.

We have an issue from Sun Valley Drive out to Golden Valley.

I live on that street.

You ought to see the way they drive on that street.

You have Samais coming down there with her Jake brakes on.

That tells you that they're not doing 35 miles an hour.

That's where the issues are.

Not tearing up a road that's not broke.

It rained out there last night and it didn't flood.

That was another excuse was the 100-year flood.

I've seen two of those in the 56 years I've been here.

Sun Valley did just fine.

And then I'd like to comment on food trucks.

You guys are here to help the community and help the businesses of Sun Valley.

Not be encouraging other people out there, taking away from the businesses of Sun Valley, and that's what these food trucks are doing.

We had an event out there the other night, and Sun Valley GID member went down there and said he didn't understand a word that was said there.

Obviously, not in English.

And these people are taking away business from people that are paying taxes that have businesses there that are paying your guys a salary, and it's being encouraged by her.

She's the one that had the event.

Mr.

Malone, I'm gonna ask you to stop the clock real quick.

I just want to remind you that the comments are to be made to the body as a whole.

And I don't know.

Well, the comments are gonna be made where they're being made because you the body in the whole is not the one putting the advance out, they're taking business away from the other businesses.

No, I appreciate that comment.

No, you just want to make I just want to reiterate that we have to abide by the boundaries within public comment.

Okay, well, there's your you're the explain to me if you had a business out there how you would feel if the people you're paying tax money to is taking business away from you by encouraging these food trucks.

You got a Tamali stand sitting in front of AutoZone every 6 to 8 a.m.

on Sun Valley Drive.

People pulling off on on the main drag when, and this is being encouraged, and nothing being done by you people.

That's the problem out there.

So, and like I said, taking Sun Valley Drive away from the state is a very, very bad idea.

Washoe County, when they go broke, Sun Valley's the first place they take money away from.

Let the state take care of their problems out there.

Thank you.

Nicholas St.

John, followed by Veronica Cortez.

Thank you.

For the record, Nicholas St.

John.

Last time I was here, I brought in this sign so that the public can see what I'm talking about because not especially for cameras.

Uh they don't necessarily show this.

So this was the uh information that I had shared you.

You guys each have that in front of you.

This is the uh interesting part in uh early voting.

So what you see there is the dip below the line, all these negative spikes are where ballots were taken from third party voters and moved from third party apparently into Republican and Democrat ballots.

Uh I asked for question or asked for the ROV to explain that.

And uh I was told by Kate that that he would he would uh explain it.

Something came up that he couldn't at the last meeting.

I I requested he would do that in this meeting.

Since then, I've added um another another piece to this, which is the election day, and I found that we had the same thing.

So all total 487 votes ballots were moved from third party redistributed mostly into Republican and Democrat ballots.

Uh I've done run this analysis on every uh other county in the in the state, not one single county, not even uh Clark, which has 5.2 times more ballots or voters than Washo has anything close to this.

This makes us a laughing stock for not being able to even get our counts right.

So when you see 2,929 uh votes or ballots from third party, and then they get removed 304 of them into third party.

I would think that the commissioners would consider that that would be something worth looking into.

Did you guys do that last time?

No, you ignored me.

So uh I'm here again to try to get your attention to have have the ROV explain why these uh ballots are moving.

Is it a small amount?

No, 15% in early voting was moved from removed from third party and redistributed to Republican and Democrat.

And then for uh early um or election day, it was 19% were removed from third party in redistributed into the Republican and Democrat ballots.

We're the only county in the state that this happened to.

So uh I'm asking you that if you would like more information and where we can have a dialogue during your uh item, you can actually call me back up here and we can actually have a dialogue about this issue.

So in the meantime, uh hopefully, Kate, you've had this uh set up and we can hear from the ROV why they were moving ballots and why the act accounts weren't accurate when I download them from the Secretary of State.

Thank you.

Veronica Cortez, followed by Oscar Williams, this is what morning everybody.

Veronica Cortez, the lunch lady.

I brought a book today.

Um, this book is actually meetings that I've been going to since December of 2024.

Now, during that time, um I was placed on the citizens appointed to the citizens advisory board, although I am in district five.

We use a one-mile amendment, and Garcia pointed me to the board, so thank you so much.

And as I was reviewing these minutes, we got a lot of work done when I first got on the board.

We cleaned up properties, we listened to the people.

We did what the citizens wanted, and uh I was given all this handbooks and codes of conduct and all this stuff that I was required to follow to be on the cab.

And one of these things that you know I highlight is that um there it's the expectation.

So you can find this.

This is the February 29th, 2024 staff board meeting, and it goes along how um there is um code of conduct within the cab, and it it has values like integrity and effective communication, quality public service, tolerance, fairness, courtesy, and professionalism.

Perfect.

When I read this, I was like, that's exactly how I want to advocate for some valley since I was born in St.

Mary's, taking out their grandma grandpa out there.

So this is what I call my accountability book.

And I go through and I highlight things that have been promised to us or said to us, and here we are a year and a half later, and the things are not being done.

So some things I would like to highlight specifically for Sun Valley.

Um we did get approved the amount that we were looking for, the 25 million, so we could cover the 80 million beautification Sun Valley thing.

Great.

I'm excited.

Um, like our commissioner said to quote, this is 80 years a crisis in Sun Valley, which I honestly personally can't agree with because my grandparents came in the 60s and it was amazing.

We had a two-lane road, everybody was working agriculture.

So I would just like to from somebody who's been in Sun Valley all their life, third generation in, now going on fifth generation.

We have not been in an 80-year crisis.

And I'm sorry that our commissioner feels that way, that's sad.

Also, I would just like to um just put out some other quotes that were said.

You can find these on the minutes from the cab.

Um, according to these, according to the citizens, we've been asking for bus pull outs for the boulevard.

If the buses can't get out, we can't get by.

When we brought it up because we've been asking for it for a year, we were told by our representative.

Now you can walk along with me during this, or you can fight it.

That's up to you.

I can assure you I understand I can respect your stance.

But unfortunately, we don't feel that way.

So I would hope we can reconsider what we're doing.

Thank you.

Oscar Williams, followed by Brian Wadsworth.

Good morning.

Excuse me.

Uh, I'm Oscar Williams.

Pleasure to be here today.

I want to talk about item 11 and with what time I have left, item 7F1.

Item 11 is the proposed bill draft requests.

And I noted in the staff report, quote, the board requested that staff inquire as to the likelihood of a bill regarding automatic recounts of elections.

I appreciate that sentiment.

However, I think there was maybe a missed opportunity here.

It's not that we want automatic recounts, it's a better uh definition of how recounts are actually conducted.

Okay.

We would be better served by a bill draft request that would amend the wording of NRS 293404 uh clause three.

I'll get to that in one second.

Let me take a step back and give you a little anecdote.

I think we can all agree.

You guys like math.

I think we can all agree that four times four equals sixteen.

Now, if you're going to uh audit your own math, are you gonna do four times four again?

Or are you gonna pursue a different method?

Maybe 16 divided by four equals four.

So you find the route, right?

That's how you check your math, not with another multiplication, you check it with your division.

Now let's apply that logic to our elections.

NRS 293404 clause three says that the uh recount must be conducted using the same methods as the original tabulation.

That is a vendor cover your ass move.

Pardon my French, but if you're a vendor, you'll love that.

But it's got nothing to do with election integrity or voter trust.

If we merely change the language of that clause three of NRS 2934 to read, the recount shall be done by hand.

The recount shall be conducted by hand, not by the same method as the original tabulation was conducted.

That's the old wording.

We want some new wording, and I would recommend that you revisit your desire for uh integrity in the recount by considering my suggestion here on revision of NRS 2000.

Does that make sense?

I would try to make sense.

I hope so.

Um let me move on to item 7F1.

That's the interlocal agreement with the Secretary of State regarding VREMS and knowing.

For one, I'd ask that it be removed from the block vote and it'd be open for proper discussion and separate vote.

Um basically, uh the Secretary of State wants Washington to pay for the knowing poll pads that it refuses.

He refuses to classify as critical infrastructure, and thus ignore proper inspection and approval by his office, right?

He's ignoring uh passing the book of his responsibility to ensure that the things is safe.

All right, the VRMS comes with the strings attached as Washoe has had to upgrade his equipment to accommodate the VRMS and automated signature verification, which voters and taxpayers have not been asked to approve and have not approved.

I'm out of time.

I wish I had more time, but I would say thank you.

Brian Wadsworth, followed by Rob Pierce.

I found the phone class.

Good luck.

I got all your notes.

Go ahead.

Oh, good morning.

For the record, my name is Brian Wadsworth, and I'm a member of the Pyramid Lake Pai tribe.

And I'm also running as the Democratic candidate for Washer County Commissioner for District 5.

I wanted to make a couple couple comments on a couple of agenda items.

One, I'm I was super excited to see a lot of the agenda items in the consent agenda regarding the audits for Washoe County.

Um my background is in auditing and accounting.

I spent several years working for EndOt in their internal audit division conducting compliance audits on their various contracts and agreements, as well as spending several years working in the governor's finance office as an executive branch auditor, so conducting performance audits, looking at efficiency and effectiveness for our executive branch agencies.

And so I'm disappointed in the audit committee.

I noticed they canceled several meetings last year and they've had a couple meetings this year, but hopefully, you know, they can continue having their quarterly meetings.

I think audits are very important.

I don't I think as an auditor, we shouldn't be scared of auditors.

I think they're a great tool for our government or any business seeing where the money is being spent, or even looking at the policies and procedures for those agencies, um ensuring that they're running as efficiently and effective as as possible.

And second, I just wanted to um advocate um for Catherine Yarte for Washoe County Planning Commission.

Um, in this day and age, having a Democrat um advocate for a Republican.

Um, so I was just really impressed with Catherine Yarte, and she was one of the Republican candidates for Washoe County Commissioner for District 5.

I was just impressed by her advocacy and seeing her out within the communities at all the different meetings I was at, whether the cab meetings or here or other community events, she was always out there and wanting asking questions and wanting to learn more about the county.

And as a member of the Pyramid Lake Piot Tribe, and please stand me if I'm if I'm wrong, but I believe she was the only Republican candidate for Washoe County Commissioner, District 5 to even mention tribes and talk about tribal sovereignty.

And as a tribal member, that that means a lot to me.

And I think we need more representation, more people thinking about tribes.

We have in District 5, we have the Reno Sparks Indian Colony, and then my tribe within District 5.

We also have some of the Lake Paite tribe as well as the Washi tribe here in Washoe County.

So tribal representation matters and it matters, and it's great to have someone potentially being on the Washoe County Planning Commission that would take into account tribes and our tribal sovereignty.

And thank you.

Thank you.

Rob Pierce.

While Rob approaches, we do not have speakers from Incline Village nor Grockman.

Good morning, Chair and Commissioners.

My name is Rob Pierce.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

Unfortunately, I will not be able to sit around for the meeting today.

I have a prior engagement that I'm actually late for.

But four years ago, you guys appointed me to the planning commission.

And I want to say that it has been one of the greatest honors of my life.

Thank you.

During my years, I've approached every meeting, every application, and every vote with the understanding that decisions have a lasting impact on the residents of Washoe County.

I worked hard to be prepared to ask thoughtful questions, to listen carefully to staff, the applicants, and the public, and to make decisions based upon our master plan, our county code, state law, and the matters before us.

Over the past four years, I have maintained an excellent attendance record and have devoted countless hours outside the meetings, reviewing staff reports, visiting project sites, and studying the issues before us.

I believe that my preparation and consistency matter, and I've already taken that, I've taken that responsibility seriously.

As many of you know, I'm currently candidate for the county commissioner district five.

And regardless of the outcome of the general election, my commitment to serving Washoe County remains unchanged.

Public service has been a significant part of my life for many years, and I would welcome the opportunity to continue serving on the planning commission if you would believe that I have earned your confidence for another term.

Planning is more important now than ever.

This is not the time to appoint somebody new to the commission.

There is too much going on.

But if you don't choose me, please choose someone with experience.

I have worked hard for these last four years to try to get to where we are.

And putting somebody new in there, I don't think is the right decision right now.

I respectfully asked for the consideration for reappointment for another four years.

If reappointed, I will continue to serve with same integrity, professionalism, independence, and commitment that I have demonstrated throughout my term.

Thank you for your trust, your consideration, and for the opportunity to serve the people of Washoe County.

Thank you.

There's nobody else signed in.

Thank you.

We'll go ahead and close item four and now move to item five, Manager Thomas.

Thank you.

Item number five is commissioners, county managers' announcements, reports, and updates to include board and commission updates, requests for information or topics for future agendas.

I have two quick things, if I may, madam chair.

We have some openings.

Um we have a partial term for the open space and regional parks commission.

I'll remind everybody this is an advisory board to the to the Board of County Commissioners, is responsible for giving guiding decisions on the county's parks, open space, and recreation resources.

That is a partial term that begins at appointment through June 30, 2027.

The deadline to apply is Wednesday, July 15th.

So if you're interested, you have a very short time frame.

Please go to our website.

And then we do have ongoing openings that are specific to a district for the Citizens Advisory Board.

Those are open indefinitely, but please refer to your cab district by going to our website to see and explore those openings.

The only other thing I had, Madam Chair, is that I remind everyone that we have our summer break coming up.

Our next meeting is not until August the 25th.

So we have five weeks between the business that the board does today and the end of August.

So just want to remind everybody of that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Herman, do you have anything?

Yes, I do.

Thank you.

Um I due to the fact that we've had more than one person um speak on seven F1.

I would suggest that we remove it from consent and have it heard separately.

Okay, when we get to consent, we'll remember your request.

We're in you're welcome.

Is there anything else?

No, that that we'll do it for now.

Okay, great.

Commissioner Hill.

Madam Chair and uh community, I just wanted to celebrate the reopening of the women's crossroads uh facility.

Um it was an incredible day, and so much healing has already happened in those buildings, but they needed the attention.

And I just want to commend the board for really supporting these programs of ensuring that community members have second and third chances to really get their lives together.

We heard from a mom who got her children back.

And it just was very touching and exciting to see that we're reinvesting in folks who have been left behind in this community.

And I just want to commend the staff and the commission for the work on that.

So it was a great day.

Thank you.

Thanks.

And I'll just add uh kudos to the staff for creating such a welcoming, welcoming place to be.

They did a great job.

Vice Chair Garcia.

Thank you to everyone who came and did public comment.

A couple of the public commenters mentioned the Sun Valley Boulevard Improvement Project.

So I just wanted to touch on that.

Um, first and foremost, thank you to Commissioner Hill.

She is the chair of the RTC board.

If you didn't know, um, we have an amazing board over there at RTC that's comprised of Reno Sparks in Washoe County.

Um, and as you can imagine, there's a lot of competing needs and um desires, I think, from board members.

And for the first time in history, I think that Sun Valley Boulevard was prioritized as the number one federal priority for RTC's board.

And that that goes to show the leadership and and the um open-mindedness and just you know the professionalism on that board.

I can't thank them enough because we submitted three different federal grants, didn't get the first one, didn't get the second one, and third third one was a charm.

We were looking for that last 25 million dollar GAP funding.

And this is really a special project because we have NDOT, Washoe County, RTC, and now the federal government, all who have skin in the game to improve this really antiquated uh stretch of of highway.

Um, for the first time in history, this highway, we will no longer see the ditches and culverts that so many cars flip into or bicycles or even wheelchairs um slip into.

Those will be covered up.

Um, it will be paved over uh with brand new bicycle facilities, sidewalks, lighting, um, improved bus stops, and most importantly, and it's not as exciting to talk about, but it's so desperately needed is uh we've never had a modernized stormwater drainage system in Sun Valley, and so we're really excited that this project will for the first time bring that safety and infrastructure that's so desperately needed out there.

In total, it's an 87 million dollar project as of today.

Um, but I just want to thank the board members, thank our congressional delegates and our Washoe County staff for being such good partners.

I think this is gonna be a really transformative and historic project for our region.

So thank you.

Thank you.

I'll go ahead and then close item five and we'll move now to presentations.

Manager Thomas.

Thank you very much.

This morning we are joined by Andrew McDonald, our registrar voters.

He's here to give us our quarterly update regarding the road to the 2026 general election.

Um, and he's joined by his deputy registrar Reggie Greer.

Welcome.

Good morning.

Good morning, Chair Andrea, Vice Chair Garcia and Commissioners.

My name is Andrew McDonald, the Washoe County Registrar Voters.

Uh, thank you for having me today.

As we drive down the road to the 2026 November General, I wanted to provide some historical data to help grasp what we could expect in November and update you on efforts of our office that we'll be undertaking for uh and moving up until the general election.

Please note that we are only 120, 112 days away from election day and 95 days from early voting.

So we are in the thick of it already.

Uh the next slide, um, due to time, I probably won't be going uh too detailed into some of these slides, but uh we currently have 326,638 active registered voters.

You can see the breakdown between Democrat, non nonpartisan, Republican, and other uh you'll see that a dramatic drop in active registrations in October of 2025 as that kind of roller coaster really comes down as we completed bulk voter list maintenance uh from active to inactivating voters that did not uh meet the spirit of becoming still an active voter, and again, right before the 90-day NAVRA or uh blackout period in March of 2026, which is 90 days prior to the June election, you'll also see that dip.

And now it's coming back up as people are starting to register to vote.

Voter list maintenance efforts.

Um, we are working again on bulk uh list maintenance activities as I speak.

Uh we mailed approximately 19,500 forwardable address confirmation cards to voters after the primary uh canvas of the vote.

This is required before any inactivations would occur.

This includes 13,800 due to the primary undeliverable ballots from this last election cards that went out, 3200 through the Eric or electronic registration information center program, and about 2500 because of undeliverable mail ballots from prior to the uh not mail ballots from undeliverable mail prior to the um primary election.

Voters have 33 days from July 2nd mailing, that's when we mailed to respond and prevent the registration from becoming inactive.

They can do this by mailing back the postcard that they receive, and again, it's forwarded to them, um visiting our office or updating their voter registration online.

Our office has only until August 5th to complete valid inactivations per National Voter Registration Act, uh, bulk list maintenance deadline.

After this date, we can no longer perform bulk voter list maintenance on the voter rolls.

However, if a voter onesie comes in and does what they need to do, of course, we will take action per their request.

If a voter becomes inactive, they will not receive a mail ballot.

However, they can uh reactivate the registration any time before the general election by updating the road registration record.

The next slide is a couple quick graphs.

Uh, first, historical turnouts for the past general elections and voting method split.

So a 60 to 70 percent turnout in the 2026 general should be expected based on history.

Anything above 70 percent would actually be a very, very strong voter turnout.

In 2018 general election, uh the dominant method for voters was in-person voting, and that was prior to COVID 19 and mandatory Nevada universal mail and ballot.

So out of a 70% turnout, 63% of the voters voted uh in person, while only 7% voted their mail ballot or absentee ballot at that time.

In 2020, after COVID-19, all voters were sent a universal mail and ballot.

And out of that 83% turnout, 43.5 voted their mail ballot, and 39.6 voted in person.

By 2022 general, voters were used to getting a universal mail in ballot and utilized it.

Out of the 64% turnout, 34% voted by mail and 30% in person.

So in 2024 general election, out of the 79% turnout, 39% voted by mail, and nearly 40% voted in person.

What I'm assuming for the 2026 general, it will likely model the 2024 general election and roughly be a 50-50 split.

Of course, I have no crystal ball, but that's based on historical data, what I'm projecting.

As you look to the road to elections for the mail ballot trends, this is an I chart, and I apologize, there's no different colorations here, but you see at the bottom all the different elections.

And what I really want you to focus is on the right side or minus one slash election day.

That is when the majority of mail ballots are being dropped on election day.

Therefore, out of the four uh out of four of the last six elections, we saw 20% of all mail ballots being dropped on or shortly after election day.

So in the primary of 2026, we received 21% of our total mail ballots on election day slash night, leaving us to process 12,500 ballots on election day.

If we're expecting a fifth 100% more turnout, if you will, in this next election, it's possible that 25,000 ballots would be dropped on us on election day.

Therefore, um it's a large work effort because we're receiving those ballots at night, um, and we would be working multiple shifts to have to process those.

And unfortunately, at this point, we don't have the institutional knowledge to be able to put two different uh 12 hour shifts together.

Um, it does take about 12 hours.

Uh I had mentioned in my previous uh comments when I was up here to process a mail ballot from beginning to end, depending on the mail ballot drop from the US Postal Service per day.

So that being said, uh, the amount of mail ballots dropped on an election night creates a bottleneck depending on when they're received, how many are received.

The biggest bottleneck is really signature verification, extraction, and the counting group.

If grip, if given a grant, uh I would use to buy more signature verification stations and ballot extraction machines for the new warehouse.

We really don't have a lot of space to put these in for this election, but upcoming warehouse, that's where I would spend that money if given or found a grant to do so.

Automatic signature verification.

Next slide.

Uh as you know, we process mail ballot envelopes through our mail ballot sorter.

This election, we rolled out automatic signature verification on the mail ballot sorter.

And ASV software is used to compare the signature on the vote by mail envelope against the reference signature that we have in the database.

If the signature matches and exceeds the threshold, it's automatically accepted.

If not, it goes to bipartisan teams of two to check the manual signature.

In this last election, 19,432 signatures were automatically verified, or 31% of all mail ballots, saving 324 labor hours of processing.

Again, we took a very conservative approach at 72 this election at confidence level.

Uh down the road, if we felt comfortable lowering that, we would actually process more mail more mail ballots even faster.

Uh by NRS, we are supposed to audit 1% of the ASV, and we did 100% more, which is 2% of auditing, and um 374 signatures were audited.

Moving on for uh the BMDs and 88 carts.

This was the first election.

We use both uh ballot marking devices and 88 curbside voting, and we received very positive feedback from the community.

They loved the tangible ballot, they loved uh the fact that they could cast the ballot themselves and see it go in.

Uh, the initial concerns about voters uh leaving their ballot behind as a receipt.

We thought that might happen.

It actually didn't happen.

Um, but staff will continue monitoring and training up.

We had a couple discrepancies, as I mentioned in Canvas of the vote.

So we will continue our education there.

Curbside voting, uh, we hit about 40 of folks who voted curbside, and I'm really passionate about this, and I'm hoping we can continue to get people to curbside vote that want to curb site vote.

Just because you may be disabled, doesn't mean you can't get out of your car, but if you can't, for some reason, we are providing that service to you to vote in the comfort of your car.

We will also be taking out a full length graphic in our um sample ballot booklet.

Moving on to vote centers slash super centers.

We are right sizing our vote centers based on data driven decisions.

Looking over data from the last election, we offered too many early voting locations, and the numbers actually prove that.

Thus, we'll be saving taxpayer dollars by opening six less early voting locations over those two weeks, and 13 less election day locations on election day compared to a normal general election.

The trade-off for far less locations are super centers.

We'll be placing one super center in each commissioner district based on the region, how many voters voted, and looking at all the data.

We've been doing that.

And the five locations we are proposing right now are Depoli mini school middle school, renal sparks convention center again, Spanish Springs High School, O'Brien Middle School, and Hug High School.

A super center is really designed to enhance the voter experience significantly by greater capacity and providing better customer service than a traditional vote center.

Each super center would offer additional ballot marking devices, additional check-in stations, subsequently larger election day uh boards to improve voter flow on election day.

Um that's my time.

I apologize.

I can keep going or I can um whatever you'd like me to do here today.

Well, how far?

How much further do you have?

I don't want to catch off.

I have a few more slides, but I can power through very fast if you'd like me to.

We're gonna let you power through.

Okay.

Uh per NRS, I'm to place a minimum of 15 early voting locations and 25 for election day.

Uh, we will exceed that number, so we're still within NRS guidelines.

However, we'll start looking at vote centers uh each election and looking at the data over and over uh from here on out.

Remember, voters, you still have two weeks to early vote.

You have almost three weeks to vote your mail ballot, and you have election day.

So there are plenty of ways to vote.

Just want to highlight our partnership with Washoe County uh school district.

Um, about 67 of our election day locations are from the Washoe County School District, 67% on election day.

That is huge.

And we can't do it without that partnership with them.

And we're also very excited to work with our high school uh recruiting program so that high schoolers can be involved in civic engagement, but also earn some dollars there.

Federal actions don't really need to touch on this too much, but I guess the bottom line uh and highlights is Washoe County update is there's nothing really changing for the 2026 general election based on the federal um lawsuits that were filed.

Again, at this time, no changes for Washoe County and some important dates on the last slide.

Sample ballots are coming October 13th by deadline.

Uh, we're hoping to do it before then in state ballots on the 14th.

Early voting begins on the 17th, uh, ends on the 30th election day on the third canvas of the vote on the 13th of November.

And with that, I'd like to ask if there are any questions.

Thank you.

That was powering through, and you still actually did a great job.

Take a deep breath.

Thank you.

Um, thank you so much.

I really appreciate the efficiency in terms of the analysis of the consolidation of the super centers that you're calling them.

I'm glad to see that Reno Sparks Convention Center is back on there.

I'm glad that they, I hope they continue to um support the very important part of our community.

Um, I do think someone shared with me that there's a quote that might be applicable, and it's to speak to your slide, especially on the percentage of ballots that come in on the election day, and and um vote early and then in person, right?

To help with ballot processing.

So everyone vote early, vote in person.

So I'll open it up to my colleagues.

I'm gonna go ahead with Commissioner Herman.

Do you have any questions?

There I am.

It's a little tricky, but okay.

Um thank you so much for your all the information.

It's it's great you're getting these um voting places.

Um a little bit and uh I I think I'm impressed with that.

Um thank you very much.

Thank you, Commissioner Ehrman.

Thank you.

Vice Chair Garcia.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um, you touched on the question I had.

Can you pull up the slide that you when you talked about the bottlenecks?

Right there, yes.

Okay, so for you know, as elected officials, we often interact with people of all ages, new voters, um, people who have mobility issues, the whole spectrum.

So in terms of our communication, we want to emphasize if they want to use the mail in ballot, they need to drop it into their mailbox, have it out to USPS no later than.

Can you give us a so the Secretary of State this last election said a week before election day?

I was kind of hammering on three days before election day.

Please just drop it with us, just ensuring that your ballot will get there on time.

So for you all, I would say three days before election day, please just come into a vote center, drop it with us.

It comes directly back here.

There is no potential of getting lost in the USPS mail or not getting postmarked, et cetera.

So we be effectively become the USPS at that point in time.

Okay.

So you're saying the bottleneck occurs um when everybody's just holding on to those mail-in ballots.

And I've been I've done this before where I just hold it, it's on my desk or in my car, and then on election day, I just drop it in.

So you're saying get those uh get those in the ballot boxes by October 30th, before October 30th, so that you have the lay the time to process effectively.

Yeah, I and let me I know we're kind of short on time, but let me just say to you the answer is yes to that.

A mail ballot goes through a series of steps, and that is the first pass of our sorter, automatic signature verification, second manual uh signature verification, second pass, batching and groups of ballots from 15 to 25, ballot extraction, counting board adjudication, duplication due to errors, tips, tears, rips, soiled ballots, scanning ballots, digital adjudication for voter intent, tabulation, finally uploading of results.

All that is ballot processing, mail ballots.

If you look at in-person voting, it's very fast, very efficient.

Once the ballot is scanned into the tabulator, those come back on election night and are uploaded.

So I used to vote by mail every single time.

This last election is the first time I ever voted in person because I see the amount of work and people continue to say we're last for last, we're last, we're last for a few reasons.

Uh, but Nevada isn't necessarily last.

Uh California has a 30-day certification.

We have a 10-day certification, right?

But my goal is always become more efficient.

But to do so, if folks wait to the last minute, you're putting a lot of work on our our department, which is fine.

Uh, but we're not going to get results out faster.

If you vote earlier, if results come out faster, and there's a lot less work to do on us.

And obviously, voting is a personal personal preference, and we're never gonna be the ones to tell them how they should or correct vote.

But we will gently remind folks that October 30th is the day.

If you have it sitting on your desk or in your car, please drop it into a mailbox.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Hill.

Thank you for the presentation.

Great work on this last election again, and really looking forward to the general election with all of the new um accessibility things that you and your team have built in.

And I'm just making sure that the Northwest Library is still going to be an early voting center.

It will be.

Um we didn't have it, I think the last election due to a lot of the air conditioning.

I think they're replacing like 20-something air conditioning units, but yes, I've got confirmation from the ACM uh Dave Slaro that we will have it for early voting and election day.

That was the only complaint I got of the entire election.

So great work, and I'm glad to hear it's back online and won't be replaced by a super center because I think it's a it's a pretty busy location.

But uh other than that, just uh we'll support you with the messaging.

And I like voting early and then in person.

So maybe we can get that movement going to give you less of that uh last minute paperwork that you get uh extreme pressure from all these outside forces on.

So we'll do what we can to support you with that.

I am working with the Secretary of State's office too to see if we can push through, won't be this election, but changing legislation to allow people to vote their mail ballot in a vote center by scanning it in that will take a check-in that will take some changes to NRS and NAC, et cetera.

But it is something that I am actively working on pursuing.

And I mean, not to add additional legislative requirements, but we were discussing even ways that folks can drop their ballot in between early voting and election day, uh, and figuring out ways that we can uh push that as well, because technically that's not permitted by state law as well.

Even though can they drop it here?

Yeah, so we are office ROB headquarters is specifically open and they have that at least.

Yes, but that is it.

So it may be another thought to to see if there's more accessibility between those few days.

Um, but it's less of an emergency this time around because we we are able to accept mail and ballots later because of the Supreme Court ruling.

So that's correct.

Um at least one one more way that we can ensure that folks can have their voices heard and be part of this representative democracy.

But thank you very much.

Thank you.

Well, I think we might start a new hashtag, right?

Hashtag vote early, vote in person, vote for early vote in person, October 3rd deadline.

Drop off your ballot here.

Yeah, there's all kinds of communication, I think that would be helpful.

And I know that the communication team is always supportive of doing what we can to get the message out and be accurate and transparent.

Um I do want to just, if I could, um, manager Thomas, I'll just maybe direct this to you that maybe we could follow up with either with ACM, Gustav, and Mr.

St.

John.

Thank you.

All right.

Well, thank you for a great presentation.

Thanks for all your hard work and here we go.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Thank you.

All right, we're gonna go ahead and close 6A1 and we'll move now to 6A2.

Manager Thomas.

Thank you.

We are joined this morning by Abby Pike, who is our Extension County coordinator.

She is here to present the fiscal year 27 budget for the University of Nevada Cooperative Extension.

All right, thank you.

Good morning.

Welcome.

Great.

It's good to see you all.

Um, good morning, Chair and Commissioners.

Um, for the record, my name is Abby Pike.

I'm the Extension County Coordinator for Washoe County here today representing the University of Nevada Cooperative Extension.

Um, I do not have a presentation today.

I will be referencing the memo that's in the agenda.

So please refer to that for more details.

Um, just as a bit of background information, extension is a partnership between the federal, state, and county governments that brings the resources, knowledge, and research from the land grant universities to the populations around them.

And here in Washoe County, we're connected with the University of Nevada Reno.

Um, you may know extension from a few of our programs, such as 4-H Youth Development, Master Gardeners, Nevada Rade on Education Program, Weed Warriors Health and Nutrition, and our community development program, which works with Washoe County to deliver the Washoe County Leadership Academy.

Um, I am here today to fulfill our requirement per the Nevada revised statutes to present what we will be doing with the county funds that we receive from Washoe County.

So, as you can see on the memo, the vast majority of the revenue that we are receiving from Washoe County is going to personnel.

Um, over 90% of the revenue from Washoe County is going to that budget.

So I will spend most of the time today talking through what that looks like.

The people that we fund through extension, they are the ones who are going into classrooms, community centers, um, and gathering sites across the county to deliver these important educational resources.

And it also funds the administrative staff that support them and ensure that we can secure new funding from federal grants and gifts and to make sure that we are doing our reporting and administering our programs appropriately.

Um, so I want to talk through a few of the changes that are happening this year with our personnel.

A lot of it is staying similar with our consistent programs we've been running for 10, 20, 100 years, like 4-H Youth Development.

Um, the only new program that we are implementing or hoping to implement this year is the workforce development program that President Sandoval introduced when we had the UNR day at Washoe County.

Do I need to pause?

Okay.

I think you can keep on going.

We'll work through it.

Okay.

Okay, sure.

Okay.

Hello, thank you.

All right, we hear you.

Great.

Um, so this program, it will use a real-time workforce development software along with curriculum for skill development.

Um, we're hoping to be working on um interest and skill development exploration for high school students who are looking at what career they will pursue in their future.

Um, and this software, it will help them take a it will take a quiz to identify their skills and how that aligns with real-time jobs available in their community now and the pathways that are available to get there.

So it's not just about going to a four-year degree program, but it will have information on all sorts of industry certificate certifications, online programs that are available, and of course, all the educational programs from all of the NSHI institutions in Nevada.

Um, this program, we have been working for over two years with industry leaders with our state, our state partners to see how extension can most effectively help with this challenge.

Um, in the 2024 Nevada Job Seeker Survey, which really started this conversation, they found that 38% of Washoe residents identified the challenge of obtaining necessary training and credentials as their primary barrier to finding and keeping a good job.

So this program is hoping to start with high school students to improve that and then ideally expand to different age groups to meet their needs.

Um we are hoping to hire one faculty member to lead this program in Washoe County and one community-based instructor to be going into the classrooms and delivering this education.

And of course, this is just a launching point with county funds.

We hope that we will get industry buy-in and be able to partner with other counties in the nearby area that are also experiencing rapid workforce transformations to make this program sustainable in the long term.

Um, other than that, as you have heard a lot over the last year, I'm sure.

We had our SNAP ed funding terminated.

We were able to use rollover funds in the last fiscal year to continue health and nutrition education, but that has officially come to a close.

Um, we were able to use funding from the county to support one full-time program officer and one part-time community-based instructor to continue delivering health and nutrition education here in Washoe County.

It's not, it's not based on SnapEd, and that curriculum will no longer be updated as federal um nutrition guidelines change.

So we're working with our extension faculty members here in Nevada and across the country to make sure that we are still delivering the most up-to-date research-based health and nutrition education.

Um, other than that, our Living with Fire program has also experienced changes in federal funding as the BLM and the new wildland firefighting federal agency is adopting.

Um, so to ensure that they are still able to meet their objectives of educating Washoe County residents on adapting to living with wildfire and preparing for emergencies like that.

Um, we're supporting one full-time faculty member on Washoe County funds for this year.

They had a five-year contract, but it changed part way through.

So this is a bridge fund for this fiscal year to make sure that that faculty member is able to continue their K-12 wildland fire fighting education and curriculum development and to continue to work with Washoe County to develop the community wildfire protection plan.

And then we have two faculty members that we are supporting 20% of their full-time equivalent positions to make sure that they can continue going out into the community to provide community education, to provide resources proactively and to go to events that were requested at.

Their funding was changing, so they wouldn't be able to do as much community education.

And of course, living with fire, it's very critical that they are able to connect with our community directly.

Um that is a lot, that's an overview of what is changing with our personnel.

Um, other than that, I just want to highlight in our contingency funds, we do have 200,000 set aside for bridge funding.

Last year we had 500,000, and a lot of that was appropriated to the programs I've already discussed to make sure that they can continue to provide education.

Um, and one of those was the early childhood education program, which I know Commissioner Hill, you addressed last time as critical for our community.

That we are having challenges trying to figure out how to move forward with that because we don't have funding anticipated in the future.

So because bridge funding is to get them to the next grant that's supposed to be available, we're still working with them to try to figure out how we can continue implementing that.

And I may follow up if there are any philanthropic connections.

Um, I'm sure we will be reaching out soon.

Um, and beyond that, I just want to highlight we know that we're not the only people who are experiencing funding challenges.

So we're working with our with our partners, with our state and county agencies, with our nonprofits, and with our educational institutions to see what needs are emerging and what gaps are arising from these funding changes.

And we want to make sure that we are all using our resources as effectively and efficiently as possible.

So that's a lot of what I'm working on is making sure that people know what we're doing and finding out what is happening in the community and where the needs are the most significant.

Um, I think that's all for me today.

Are there is there any questions or anything you want me to go into more detail on?

Thanks for your presentation.

And I'll just add very quickly that NACOX actually stood up a committee specifically for all 17 counties to participate and looking at what those particular gaps are.

And I'm on that committee, so I'm sure that I know that this is Washo, but still I think it's important that everybody understand the commitment throughout the entire state to the UNR extension.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

Yeah, of course.

It'll be interesting to see how that committee goes.

It was very robust, wasn't it?

That meeting.

Yeah.

All right.

I'll open it up to questions, Commissioner Hill.

Do you have anything?

Vice Chair Garcia.

Commissioner Herman, do you have anything?

Commissioner Herman's still with us.

Can you read me?

We can hear you.

We can hear you.

All right.

It's a little tricky on this phone.

Um, thank you so much.

Um, we really love working with you guys and the 4-H and the Fairwall.

Well, and uh all that.

And I want to thank you for all your hard work.

Thank you.

Great program.

And I hope we can find you some money.

I appreciate that.

Thank you.

Yes, we all had a great time at the state fair.

Yeah, we did.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Ms.

Pike.

Appreciate it.

All right, we're gonna go ahead and close item six and move to item seven.

We do have a request by Commissioner Herman to pull item seven F1.

I'm gonna honor that request.

I will entertain a motion.

Madam Chairs any oh I have a disclosure.

Well, would you like to offer a disclosure?

Yes, I do.

On um 74, I attend um the Lutheran Church of the Good Shepherd.

Uh this um donation from the endowment fund.

I was not on that committee.

I have no pecuniary interest on this donation, but I did want to disclose that um I personally attend that um congregation.

So thank you, madam chair.

Of course, thank you.

Madam Chair, I'd also like to make a disclosure on item 7D one.

This is related to the UNR Street Reach program.

I'm an employee of the University of Nevada Reno.

I am not involved with this project and I have no peculiar interest.

So with that, I move to approve the consent um, minus the one that Commissioner Herman requested.

Second.

7F1 is what we're pulling 7F1.

Manager Thomas, do you want to read into the record and then I'll circle back with the motion and the second and then any discussion and then public comments.

So we are we're rocking and rolling, but well, let's just back up for the 10 F1 out of the record.

Um, actually, why don't we hold off on 7F1 for the record?

So we're pulling that.

Is there any public comment?

There is not for any of the items except 7F1.

Okay, thank you.

So we are looking at the motion then um uh Vice Chair Garcia was 7A1 through 7E4.

And we have a second.

Any further discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries unanimously.

We'll now move to 7F1.

Thank you, Manager Thomas.

Thank you.

7F1 is a recommendation to approve a two-year interlocal agreement between Washoe County and the Nevada Secretary of State outlining the duties and obligations of each party for ongoing maintenance of the voter registration and election management system known as VREMS implemented pursuant to state law.

The agreement requires the county to contribute a share cost of the no ink total vote election management system in the amount of 238,000 for fiscal year 27 and 28 at 119,000 per fiscal year.

And if this item is approved, it authorizes the division director of purchasing and contracts to execute the agreement.

Um, if I may, this is obviously the authorization for the county to pay our share of the state's top-down system, of which all um counties are utilizing, and this replaces our legacy system DIMS, which we were using, which was the in-house unsupported system.

So if there's any ambiguity about what this item is, we have Register McDonald's here to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'll go ahead and call for public comment at this time, please.

Penny Brock.

Penny Brock from the for the record.

Thank you for pulling this to be heard.

Um my story about this no wink system started in the general election of 24.

I knew it was coming.

I did not recall that it been approved by the county commissioners.

So when I got there, there was table set up, and you had to sit down before we just walk up and sign a paper log book.

I'm going, well, this is gonna take a while.

And sure enough, it did.

Many vote centers had backups because of this no wink system.

So you were to advance from screen to screen.

I could not identify two numbers I was supposed to certify were correct.

So I said, I cannot advance.

She goes, then you can't vote.

Then you can't vote.

And because I did not know what that was, and it's like under what penalty of perjury.

So I did not advance it, and I did not get to vote.

This year, I again went in person and I confirmed what those two numbers were for, so there's no issue.

So then after I advanced it, and she asked to see my driver's license, which is fine.

I think we should show a picture ID when we vote.

I hand her my driver's license.

She doesn't give it back to me.

She starts to put it in to this electronic e-poll book.

I said, I do not want my driver's license scanned in.

I do not approve that.

Again, she goes, then you can't vote.

Then you can't vote.

Well, we've got a couple issues going on here.

First of all, the people that use the mail-in ballot, they do not have to enclose a picture of their driver's license.

So that's discrimination for those that vote in person.

But then I heard of a woman who did not want to use this e-pull book because she didn't want her information scanned in the cloud.

And that is a concern.

So again, she was re denied the right to vote.

One of the people that sat in the observation booth with me, they went to vote in person at public market on election day.

Now don't you want to see our driver's license?

And he was told no.

No, he didn't have to show his driver's license.

So again, I was discriminated against at least three times.

Now I've got an article here put out by the election integrity network, who has written um a nine page paper on why dominion plus a no wink equals disaster.

With this system, there are threats to ballot secret secrecy, transparency, and security.

What could possibly go wrong?

Again, this is going to cost taxpayers, you know, millions of dollars.

I already heard him in that presentation he did.

He wants more money for more equipment.

Thank you.

Thank you.

There's nobody else signed in.

Does anyone have any questions?

Commissioner Herman, would you um like any clarification on this item based on your request to have it pulled?

Can you hear me now?

Yes.

That's tricky.

All right.

Um I I don't have any comments.

I just uh tend to agree with the problems that people have had and because of these problems pertaining to this item.

So I just feel that uh I I'll let you proceed how you need to proceed.

Okay, thanks.

Um I don't know if there's any other questions or need for clarification on this particular item.

Is there any there's no other public comment?

Okay, I'm gonna go ahead and ask for a motion at this time, please.

So moved, madam chair.

We have a motion by Commissioner Hill.

Do we have a second?

Second, second by Vice Chair Garcia.

Any other discussion?

Harry Man, all those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Nay motion carries three to one.

Thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

We're gonna go ahead and move now.

We again, just as a reminder, we're moving the block after item 10.

So we're gonna move to item eight.

Um, I think we that can we take a five-minute break?

Can we take a five-minute break?

I I well, well, then reads it.

I am a consensus person, so if someone really doesn't want to take a break, I suppose I can override that, but I do believe in consensus and fairness and being equitable.

But I'll go ahead and follow your lead manager, Thomas.

We're gonna take a break at 11:38 for five minutes.

All right, I'm gonna call this meeting back to order at eleven forty-six.

And just to establish clarity, we have Commissioner Herman and Commissioner Garcia both on the line.

So we still have a quorum.

Can we get a verbal on that from them?

Well, I'm going to, if I could, just I'm trying.

I'll do faster.

Commissioner Herman, would you be so kind to let us know that you hear us?

Uh can you hear me?

Yes.

Then I hear you.

Yay.

Commissioner or Vice Chair Garcia, can you hear us?

Yes, I can.

Thank you so much.

All right.

We are going to move to item eight.

Manager Thomas.

Thank you.

There's two parts to feel bear with me.

Um item eight is a recommendation to one approve the appointment of one candidate to the Washaw County Planning Commission, which is representing Commission District One, which generally includes Incline Village in Crystal Bay, most of the forest area along the west side of Mount Rose Highway, and portions of the southwest Trucky Meadows area.

This would serve a full term beginning on the date of appointment and ending on June 30th, 2030, or until such time as the candidate is no longer serving on the planning commission or a successor is appointed, whichever occurs first.

There are two applicants listed, one is eligible, one isn't eligible.

And then two, we're approving the appointment of one candidate to the Washoe County Planning Commission representing the at-large seat north of the river, which includes areas of unincorporated county north of the Truckie River to serve a full term beginning on the date of appointment and ending on June 30th, 2030 until such a time as the candidate no longer serves, or successor is appointed, whichever occurs first.

We have six eligible and two ineligible in that category.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

If um we go ahead and take these as two separate motions.

Okay.

I don't think um a ballot is necessary unless you like one.

Okay.

So we'll just go ahead and ask for public comment at this time for that item, please.

First up, we have Wendy Leonard followed by Katherine Yarte.

Okay.

Um then John Christianson, yeah.

This is the first one, Mr.

Christianson.

Okay, that answered that question.

We will call them for item two.

Thank you so much.

So hearing no public comment, I'll go ahead and um essentially ask for a motion for the vacancy that has Daniel and I may be pronouncing his last name in Azar.

I'll go with that.

Lazaretchi, thank you.

Mr.

Lajareshi.

I I move to approve um uh Mr.

Lazarechi to this um the uh planning commission representing commission district one.

Thank you.

All right, we have second that okay.

We have a motion by Commissioner Hill, a second by Commissioner, is that Herman?

Yes, it is.

Thank you so much.

Any further discussion?

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 so much.

So we'll now move to item eight two.

Do you want to go ahead and give us a little bit of background on this?

Sure.

Alexander Wilson for the record.

So for this appointment, it affects uh four out of the five districts.

So you do have six candidates in front of you that are eligible for appointment.

Um, after public comment, we will ask to bring over the ballots.

Will you select your top two individuals for that one opening?

Thank you.

All right, I'll call for public comment this time, please.

Thank you.

Okay.

Up first, Wendy Leonard, followed by Catherine Yarte.

Thank you very much.

Wendy Leonard, um, I'm here to speak to you regarding the potential appointment to the uh planning commission.

I'd like to start with um Mr.

Pierce's request to be put on the planning commission.

I'm certain that uh you know, or if you don't, you'll research this that NRS 278.040 would not allow him to sit as a commissioner as well as sitting on the planning commission.

You can't sit on an appellate board.

And so I believe that Mr.

Pierce's request is motivated due to self-interest rather than consistency within the county.

And what I would like to see out of the commission is appoint somebody who can be consistent moving forward, and I'd like you to allow him to focus more on his campaign.

He's very very likely to be sitting as a county commissioner uh very soon.

And I would hope that you would appoint somebody who uh doesn't have political interest outside of that commission.

It's important to me um to ensure that all of the needs and all of the recommendations of the public as well as the county are met on this commission.

And what that means to me is taking into consideration not just Nevada revised statute and Washoe County Code, but what the public wants and what they need.

And what that means is that we would not want to fall under what Las Vegas fell under in 2024 with a 286 million dollar settlement because the commission and the board continued to deny requests for development, which resulted in a uh Supreme Court um ruling against the the board, resulting in in the citizens having to pay out 286 million dollars.

That's significant.

If you don't have somebody on these commissions who can look at laws, rules, and regulations and act within those rather than in political interests, it can be harmful to the county.

So I would ask that you consider me based on my history, uh, my experience in looking at reviewing um rules, laws, regulations, and figuring out how to apply those, as well as looking at um case law and how that may apply to um issues in front of the commission.

Although I don't know all of the Washoe County Code, chapter 110, it's 1236 pages.

What I do know is I know how to look into those codes and how to apply those codes based on um the the issues before before the planning commission, as well as that NRS 278 that dictates the rulings of and the recommendations of the planning commission to this commission.

Um it's very important that you have somebody that can actually read into those, apply those, and be a uh a voice of reason for the commission.

Thank you very much for your time today and for everything you do.

Thank you.

Catherine Yarte followed by Don Christensen.

She's much shorter than me.

Uh good morning.

I was checking the time to make sure I could still say good morning.

Uh my name is Catherine Yarte, and I'm asking for your support for my appointment to the Atlarge North of the River seat for the Washoe County Planning Commission.

I've lived in Washoe County since 1986 and since 2016.

I've lived in Washoe County since 1986 and since 2016 I have lived and operated my business in Rancho Haven in the North Valleys area of unincorporated Washoe County.

I've been showing up at this dais and others for years, not just as a business owner but as a community member who has a stake in how these decisions get made.

When you look at the applicants before you today I want to highlight something I think matters for this appointment in particular.

Among this group I am the only applicant who has been regularly attending the planning commission meetings, board of county commissioner meetings, cab meetings and more actively engaging with the county process and apart from Mr.

Pierce who has currently served on this and other boards I respect that experience and I thank him greatly for his service.

I do agree with Ms.

Leonard that because he's currently running for the county commission seat that that may create a conflict further down the road.

And I do point out as a previous candidate I did not actually apply for this until after the uh election because I did not want that conflict.

I bring a sustained ground level engagement along with a fresh perspective and someone who's been watching this process closely, learning it from the outside in and recently achieving real results within it I believe that a combination of active involvement and fresh eyes is something this commission can put to good use.

My 13 year career in uh preclinical research trained me how to review complex technical material carefully ask precise questions and evaluate evidence before reaching conclusions.

Those skills translate directly in reviewing land use and development applications.

I've been meeting with developer consultants to understand better their perspectives as well as residents of the uh neighborhoods that are being directly affected by the planning a planning commission makes better decisions when every member comes to the table prepared and that's a standard I hold myself to I work as a member uh my work as a member of the Rancho Haven property owners association has required me to bring people with competing interests to a shared understanding and a shared outcome while ensuring community members' thoughts, concerns and opinions are heard and received that skill is exactly what a cohesive board needs members who can listen carefully weigh the full picture and move forward together even on difficult decisions.

As co-owner of Team Arte Horsemanship and founder and president of the Nevada Equine Council, I've spent nearly three years navigating Washoe County's equine business code in its current state and participating in the amendment process championed and led by Commission Chair Andreola.

That effort led to a unanimous vote and approval by the planning commission just last week on July 7th that recent success represents years of sustained engagement collaboration with planning staff and a willingness to keep working even when the progress was slow.

This is exactly how I will approach this commission seat.

Earlier this year I also spoke before the planning commission about a gap in our development code related to road improvement timelines where approvals were moving forward based on infrastructure schedules that could shift before construction was complete.

That's the kind of issue I'll keep watching for places where the process works on paper but falls short for the people already living here.

Thank you.

Don Christiansen Good morning it's almost noon Madam Chair and members of the commission I'm kind of torn in reaffirming my application to the Planning Commission for the at-large um district um I have worked with Rob Pierce extensively over the last six years.

I was his vice chair on the uh CAB that's not C the um forgive me Board of adjustment thank you the BOA board of adjustment um during that time I again I'm torn because I don't like the idea of running against Rob.

I endorse him a hundred percent however I'd be remiss if I didn't put my I had in the ring my experience on the both of the CAB at Spanish Springs and of course for the Board of Adjustment is giving me a unique opportunity to learn the procedures the codes the ethics everything involved with this position and I would serve diligently I had an exemplary voting record and attendance record for the board of adjustment for those four years that I was on there and uh I take it seriously I have attended many meetings silently of the uh might be inappropriate for a member of the CA for the BOA to speak to issues that it might have to be here later.

It might be inappropriate for a member of the CA for the BOA to um speak to issues that it might have to hear later.

Um so yes, I I'm quite familiar with the planning commission as procedures and its philosophy.

And I would adhere, of course, to the uh to the law.

I look forward to uh perhaps being appointed today, and uh I love Washoe County.

I've been here for almost 50 years and I love it and I love the people here.

I'm well regarded in my neighborhood as someone who has ethics, integrity and a caring attitude about issues that would come before the planning commission.

And I I mean I appreciate this opportunity to speak to you folks.

Thanks.

Thank you.

There's nobody else signed in.

Thank you so much.

All right, Miss Wilson.

I guess Alexander Wilson for the record.

So now we'll pass out the ballot for this at large north of the river, where you'll select your top two candidates.

Thank you.

May I make a quick little statement before we vote statement if you'd like to uh I typically vote for the incumbent, and especially if they're showing up, doing a good job, um, engaged, doing the homework, all that.

And I'm I certainly believe that the incumbent in the seat has been doing that.

I just want to make it clear why I will not be voting for the incumbent.

Uh I think that Mr.

Pierce um running for office and being a planning commissioner just makes me feel uncomfortable.

I have to be honest.

Uh I think that this is a great opportunity to um ensure that we have folks that don't necessarily have that conflict.

And I I really appreciate his service and appreciate that I know he's put in so much work on this board on the boa, on the cab, um, very engaged in the community, which is why he's running for commissioner.

So um that that's why I am not voting for the incumbent.

I just wanted to be clear about that, madam chair.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And I don't want to have um Miss Gusison also say anything about me uh talking outside of the agendized item, but I think that there'll be opportunities for us to have a discussion as a whole later with these kinds of um possible conflicts where you're running for office and you're holding a seat, especially those that are in quasi-judicial roles, but I am kind of leading that charge, and Miss Govsinson knows that, so I'll be working with Miss Skefsanson at a later time to bring something maybe to the board.

So having said that, we have a ballot.

You're wanting us to choose two.

Um we certainly have two commissioner vice chair Garcia and Commissioner Herman that are on the line.

So how would you like us to do that?

Uh it would be best once we uh tally the votes in person to ask online who they would like to cast for their talk to.

Thank you.

Absolutely.

Round one commissioner Hill.

Jen Guserson for the record, real quick.

As a matter of procedure, I think it would be better for um to start with the people online so that their votes are not potentially influenced, but I think that's sort of right.

Great suggestion.

Um that was a great suggestion.

So I'm just going to ask Vice Chair Garcia if you would share with us your two names, please.

Of course, Madam Chair, I vote for Sarah and Wendy.

Okay.

And Commissioner Herman.

Catherine Yarke.

And Don Christensen great.

Thank you.

Okay.

We have marked those votes, so let's uh proceed.

Uh Commissioner Hill, Don Christensen, and Wendy Leonard.

And uh Chair Andreola, Sarah, I can't say Sarah and Wendy Leonard.

Thank you.

Well, it looks like we have three votes for Miss Leonard.

And um, I will do we need that in the form of a motion.

I move to appoint Ms.

Leonard to the um at-large north of the river planning commission seat, madam chair.

Thank you.

That's that's Vice Chair Garcia.

Was that a second?

Yes, Madam Chair.

Okay, thank you so much.

So we have a motion and a second for Miss Wendy Leonard.

Uh any other discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed.

Nay.

All right.

We have uh motion three to one for Miss Leonard.

Congratulations and thanks to everyone who applied.

It was um always difficult making the decisions, but we appreciate you putting in your time and hopefully you'll be doing that again.

So thank you.

Is there anything else on that item?

I think that closes item eight.

We'll open item nine.

Manager Thomas.

Thank you.

Item nine is a recommendation to appoint one candidate from a pool of 23 applicants that are listed on the agenda.

This is to fill one midterm vacancy on the Washoe County Library Board of Trustees pursuant to state law beginning August 1st, 2026 and ending on June 30th, 2027.

And we have Miss Wilson with us again.

Just to give some background on this item.

Uh at the previous meeting we had voted on two candidates for the library board of trustees where we had 25 applicants.

Um of course, because two individuals were appointed.

Now we're down to the 23, and we're able to use the list that we have in front of us today.

And so um similar to the previous appointment, you'll select your top two individuals for this one vacancy.

Great.

I'll go ahead and call for public comment at this time, please.

Greetings, board.

Uh my name is Sean Sullivan for the record.

Uh you all heard from me once recently.

I made my resume pitch at uh a few meetings ago, one before the selection was made.

Uh and at that meeting, I was hoping to give you my uh priorities and my uh platform pitch.

So that's what we're gonna do today.

Uh I didn't quite make it back from luncheon time, uh, but hey, such is life.

So I'm grateful that uh getting a second chance here.

Um one of the big issues, as we all know, was ethics, and uh that has been partially uh somewhat dealt, I mean dealt with or or whatever.

I guess uh maybe she dealt with it herself.

Doesn't matter, not my business.

Uh anyways, uh my focus would be on preventing similar issues in the future.

I would advocate to hold myself accountable.

Uh make the the commitment to the NRS that the bylaws uh call out more uh have some teeth really.

Uh there's currently no consequence for violating the NRS uh codes that are called out in the bylaws, and uh that doesn't really make any sense if it's just uh the honor system and we saw some examples of those results.

Uh the other issues I'd be working on are uh restoring the hours.

Uh this requires diving into the budget.

I know uh Miss McClure is already doing this quite thoroughly, and uh working with her would be uh priority.

I've met her in person at the 60th anniversary uh celebration.

Um so I think we'd be able to work together no problem.

And the other issue also connected to the budget budget is the 10% acquisitions rule.

Uh there we'd like to get that back up to 10%.

Uh I believe it's connected to funding.

Uh so that is a critical issue.

Um I do like Ms.

McClure's data-driven approach.

I think we'd work well together.

As I mentioned, I'm an engineer, so uh data is kind of my bread and butter.

And uh I agree with some of the comments that collaborating with schools is important.

Uh the activities offered, uh we went through a dinosaur painting and uh dinosaur themed activity recently, and it was super fun.

Uh tons of kids.

This is a great marketing opportunity with schools, uh cards for all students seems like a good idea.

Uh we'd want to look into the details of how that would work and and everything there.

Um I have a record of being at the local library board of trustee meetings.

I do not have a record of being at the library because I try not to sign up for things online for security reasons, but I have been going.

Um it was mentioned that these trustees should get training.

Uh certainly support that.

Um yeah, I uh would be happy to uh lend my time and and uh any uh knowledge I can offer to to the library board of trustees.

Uh furthermore, if I get the job, I will uh expedite my plans to get a haircut.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other sorry that that's everybody in chambers?

Okay, great.

So Ms.

Wilson.

Alexandra Wilson for the record.

So I believe at this time we can pass out the ballot, and then um we'll call for the individuals online first and then those in person.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, I am going to call um Vice Chair Garcia.

Would you be so kind?

Yes, madam Chair.

Uh my votes go to Elizabeth and Lizette.

Hold on, Elizabeth.

Oh, is that Lizeth Gomez?

Is that who you're saying?

Elizabeth Cadigan and Lechuga Gomez.

Okay.

So Elizabeth Padigan and Gomez.

Is that correct, Vice Chair?

Yes.

Thank you.

Commissioner Herman.

Earl Ravid and Denise Meyer.

Okay.

Okay.

So our results for Chair Andreola, Billy James Moton, and Karen Hayes.

And for Commissioner Hill, Donna Dawson Schwartz and Kathleen Hollingsworth.

See, I I think number five.

We've gone five rounds.

Could you repeat what the chair voted for, please?

I voted for Hayes and Moton.

Karen Hayes and Billy James Moton.

Any other clarification by any of the commissioners?

Because we are now going to move to round two.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Vice Chair Garcia.

Madam Chair, I'm going to stick with my two, Elizabeth Cadigan and Lizette Lechuga.

Gomez.

Okay, great.

Commissioner Herman.

Oh, add James Mother.

And Earl Rabbit then.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

Okay.

The results for Chair Andreola, Billy James Moton, and Karen Hayes.

And Commissioner Hill, Elizabeth Cadigan, and Liz F.

Lechuga Gomez.

Okay.

Round three.

Is everybody hearing everything okay online, Commissioner Herman and Vice Chair Garcia, just making sure.

So are we there down now to which candidates?

We don't have any that made a majority.

We're in round three.

Okay, we can't we can't take the top.

We had two votes for Elizabeth Cadigan and two votes for Elizabeth Lechuga Gomez.

We do, but we also have two.

Do you want to take Padigan and Moton?

Yeah, I mean, put them in.

That's what we can do.

We can take Padigan and Moten then.

Yeah.

But we're still in round three.

And for the record, there's also two votes for Billy as well.

Yeah.

So we're down to three candidates.

Okay, give us the candidates so we're all hearing them, please.

We have James, Billy James Moton, Elizabeth Cadigan, and Lizeth Lechuga Gomez.

Okay, great.

So what are you wanting us to do, Ms.

Wilson?

Um, from those list of individuals, it might be best to select your top individual.

That's what I was thinking you were going to say.

Just wanting to make sure.

One.

One Vice Chair Garcia.

Yes, uh, my number one candidate is Elizabeth Cadigan, please.

Okay.

Commissioner Herman.

Billy James Moton.

Thank you.

Okay.

Chair Andreola selected Billy James Moton.

Commissioner Hill selected Elizabeth Cadigan.

Round four.

So we have two candidates just for the record, just making sure that everybody's clear.

Padigan and Moton.

Thank you.

Okay.

Vice Chair Garcia.

Elizabeth Cadigan, please.

Thank you.

Commissioner Herman.

Billy James Moton.

Thank you.

Results for Chair Andreola, Billy James Moton, and Commissioner Hill, Elizabeth Cardigan.

Or Cadigan.

Well, this is like deja vu for me because I'm the one who broke it last time.

So we could just keep on going on and on.

But we do need to go.

So we are down to Padigan and Moton again.

You're wanting us to select one.

Yes, that's correct.

Okay.

I have been writing down the wrong name the whole time.

I thought it was Padigan's Cadigan.

That's funny, but not funny.

Thank you.

All right.

Vice Chair Garcia, please.

I'm still gonna advocate for Elizabeth Cadigan based on her experience and connection to the Washhop County School District.

Thank you.

And for the record, it's Cadigan.

I had been saying Patigan, and I apologize for that.

Commissioner Herman.

Billy James Molten.

Thank you.

Okay.

Chair Andreola selected Elizabeth Cadigan.

And Commissioner Hill selected Elizabeth Cadigan.

So what do we have?

Was that five rounds?

Five rounds.

And so am I hearing a motion for Elizabeth Cadigan?

Move.

Happy to make a motion.

From Vice Chair Garcia, we have a motion for Elizabeth Cadigan.

We have a second by Commissioner Hill.

Any further discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed.

Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you so much.

Thanks for all your hard work on that.

And maybe when the time is right, we can do it again.

All right, we're going to close item number nine.

Congratulations to um both eight and nine, the candidates, and for all those that have been serving and applying and appreciate it.

We'll move now to item number 10.

Manager Thomas.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

This is a recommendation to consider an easement purchase and sell agreement between Washoe County and Dandini Spectrum Holdings, LLC, which is a Delaware Limited Liability Corporation for design construction, installation, use and maintenance of a requested emergency access road, including relocation of an existing public utility easement and associated improvements over across and through a portion of Washoe County property.

Assessor parcel number 520-250-31.

This is located at the terminus of Spectrum Boulevard Reno at a cost of $650,000.

The easement request would provide for emergency ingress and egress to the adjacent city of Reno approved residential development.

And if approved, this item authorizes the county manager to execute execute all the necessary documents.

We're joined this morning by ACM Solero.

He's going to provide a brief overview and introduce the grantee.

Thank you.

Good morning.

For the record, Dave Solero, Assistant County Manager.

Just a couple of quick items in the agenda item.

There are a couple of numbers transposed.

I want to put that on the record.

So the actual APN is 502, 25031, and the address is 5190, not 5100.

I'm just going to point that out.

My apologies for that.

I have had this on the agenda about three different times with the exact same numbers on it, and I did not catch it until someone pointed it out to me.

So it wasn't even me, someone else.

Developer came to us in 2023.

That was the first time it came before this board for action, and the board uh gave direction to staff to see if we could negotiate an agreement for an easement across our property.

So I'll remind the board that this is a request for an easement of a water line and an emergency access across Washa County owned property.

This property houses our uh emergency operations center as well as the uh regional uh training facility uh for the region.

Uh it is not a decision on the development project.

I think there's been some confusion in the past.

Bless you.

Uh City of Reno actually has the uh City of Reno Planning Commission and City of Reno Council have the authority over property zoning.

So this is has nothing to do with the zoning of the property of or the request uh of the uh apartment complex next door.

This is specific for uh and a requested easement across Washa County owned property.

Again, the Board of County Commissioners gave direction in August of 23 to negotiate an easement.

Uh Washa County staff, the district attorney's office took quite a bit of time working with the applicant to work through a bunch of things.

As you'll recall in uh August of 23, uh there were quite a few promises that were made and a few other things.

We're trying to make sure that we could capture as best we could in any agreement, uh, anything that was legally uh available for us to capture in such an agreement.

Uh, what you have before you is that agreement.

Uh it did appear on the agenda uh a couple of times uh for the Board of County Commissioners.

However, at the last minute, the the applicant actually requested to pull those.

So that's the gap of time between 23 and now where we are here in uh 2026.

Uh again, uh the public safety training center, quite a large piece of property.

Uh on the right-hand side here is the easement area.

The the area in red parts of it are uh existing paved access locations uh currently within the training center property.

Uh the area in blue is uh undeveloped area uh that uh then goes up and ties into uh Ranger Ranger Road, I believe is the right terminology for the road.

Um so this would be a second means of egress for the approved development within the city of Reno along Spectre Boulevard, uh only utilized during an emergency.

Uh secondarily, there's a water line easement that is necessary uh underneath this roadway.

The area in green on the easement area on the right is a blanket area or blanket easement currently underlying the entire uh portion of the training center uh for public utility easements.

A little bit of history on that.

Uh, when Washa County purchases property, we actually only purchased the area in green to begin with.

Uh, and so the owner at the time had a blanket easement uh for uh utilities across that property to the property to the north.

As you can see on the left, Washa County actually purchased the entire property, and that's what's in the blue.

So that green area is a portion of property that has an underlying public utility easement.

Uh and so you may hear that from the applicant.

I just want to make sure that it was understood that the reason it's only a portion of that, not the entire thing, is because Washa County bought this in two separate pieces uh when we developed the property.

Uh so again, uh City of Reno has the zoning uh on the properties.

This is not about zoning and and the approval of apartment complexes.

What this is is uh, you know, you as the property owner need to make the determination based on the information provided in the staff report whether this access and waterline easement inhibit existing or future use of the property uh and whether the appropriate the agreement is appropriate for the needs of the board of county commissioners.

Um with that, I'm available for questions, but we also have Kevin Grant uh who's owner of the property uh here to provide some information to you as well.

So I will hold off on any questions that you may have until you've heard from Mr.

Grant.

Thank you.

Yep.

Great.

Uh good morning uh uh commissioners.

Uh my name's Kevin Grant, just for the record, I saw you in April, and uh I'm really here for questions.

Um I can go through the deck.

You've had it, you've seen it.

Um it's a big project.

Uh it's 420 units.

Um last time we priced it out, it's a 120 million dollar project.

We've been at this for about six years.

Um I don't build junky products, uh projects.

I build very nice uh places.

I don't do a lot.

This is not, I'm not a developer, I'm a landowner.

I'll do a project like this maybe once every five years.

Uh I tend to develop to keep.

What that means is I put amenities into the projects that are really nice, things that I'm gonna live with, and I'm gonna hear all the complaints because I show up at the ribbon cutting and um uh we take care of our tenants.

Uh so we can go through this deck if you'd like, but I'd just like you to to know that background.

Um I'm the guy, I told you this in April.

I'm the guy that brought in the equity partner in Boston.

Uh, and there are three equity partners in this.

They're prepared to put in more equity capital and then uh seek out the bank financing to basically get us to 120 million dollars.

Uh it's um it's a substantial project.

Um we don't take this lightly.

Um the equity partner in Boston, they're not doing a lot of real estate right now.

Construction costs have gone way up.

Um, cost of capital has gone way up.

Um, and um, you know, there's a lot of need for housing.

So this is a project that's sort of bubbled up to the top.

Looking at projects across the country.

So we're very committed to it.

Mr.

Solaro is uh giving you the lay of the land of you know or where we sit.

And uh as you mentioned, this has already been approved um uh by the city.

All we really need is emergency egress to satisfy the safety requirements, and of course, we need water access, and there's plenty of water around.

Uh this particular easement is the most reliable way because it's gravity fed.

We don't like to have pumps, but if that's what we need to do, we can do that.

Uh there's a well, that's technicality.

We we will give up the easement that we currently have over your property.

Now we have no use for this easement, uh, really, honestly, just as a negotiating thing.

But down the road, um, this is an encumbrance on your property.

50 years from now, the county may decide to do something else with the property and to have this hanging over your head.

It's a really good thing to get rid of.

So we're happy to uh to um basically do an easement swap if you will.

Um there's been a lot of work um on this that's done been done in the past, and people have tried to take a shot at uh calculating the benefits to the county.

But remember, this is 420 units, it's commercial property, it will be taxed as commercial property, it's an apartment facility.

We had uh municipal finance banker uh price out or or do the math on what he thought the uh property tax revenue would be, and then ultimately uh work into you can't really see this, but work into uh the ability to bond it.

So if you have a stream of property tax revenue, then if you've got other projects that you want to do in the county, you can issue bonds uh uh against this, and uh we use or the banker used a rate of four and a half percent.

So you could you could probably bond the property tax on this and uh generate probably around 75 million of bond revenue.

That's if you choose to do that down the road once the once the property is stabilized.

Uh there's been some discussion about noise.

Um we actually uh commissioned a noise study, put a bunch of microphones around.

Um I've actually been up at the property uh a bunch.

Um the the noise would not scare my dog uh and my dog is very timid.

Um, and uh be that as may, the the the noise study informed us that really it's the how highway noise, it's really the noise.

And we can mitigate that.

This is a well tread trodden path um with construction companies and triple pay and glass, and there's all sorts of construction materials that can be used to uh to deal with any noise issues.

So we're gonna be ahead of the curve on that.

Uh I'm not gonna bore you with all the press about housing shortages across the country.

This is a this is a national story.

Uh you know the story.

You know it as well as any anybody.

I will just point out that um we can do 200 units as it stands without this easement.

Um the problem is the site costs are really high on this piece of land.

And with 420 units on a per unit basis, the um the cost of just dealing with the dirt and getting it all the infrastructure set up uh properly is about $30,000 a unit.

If we're just at 200 units, then it's $60,000 a unit.

And that translates into about $300 a month in higher rent.

That's the last thing we want to do.

I like not raising rents.

I hate raising rents.

Like I said, I developed a keep.

And the last thing you wanna do as the property owner long long term is to raise rents.

But honestly, is the last thing I I wanna do.

Sometimes it's necessary because simply the expenses go up.

So once again, that's that's my spiel.

Um I am happy to take any questions.

Um now keep in mind I'm not a developer, I'm the property owner.

I hire developers, I hire construction companies, I hire engineers to help me understand.

So I'll answer anything that I possibly can given given that background.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, if I might I know we were notified that Vice Chair Garcia needed to leave the meeting.

So for the purposes of the record, she dropped at 12:30.

Just we still have a quorum.

Thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

Thanks.

Um thank you for coming again and thanks for the first time that you came and kind of laid a little bit of groundwork on where things were at.

So I'll go ahead and open up questions for either Mr.

Solero or you as Mr.

Grant.

Uh I'm gonna go to Commissioner.

May I go to Commissioner Herman first?

Commissioner Herman, do you have any questions?

I don't.

I've been following in this project for quite a few years.

And uh this is what they need to finish up.

I will be in favor of it.

Thank you, Commissioner Herman.

Commissioner Hill.

Just uh to Mr.

Solero.

Uh the question on the easement.

And just could you clarify again the existing easement that the developer has over the county property?

Sure.

So there are there uh there's an existing blanket easement.

And maybe what I'll do is I'll just go back on this.

Um so our entire procel uh is outlined in the dark black all the way around this uh sign here or uh exhibit here.

Uh the area shaded in gray is an existing blanket uh utility easement underneath underlying the the property portion of the property, it's not the entire property.

Uh it was originally set up to benefit the property to the north that is not shaded here uh as an as a way to make sure that development could occur along that property when the uh parcels were initially sold.

Uh the way I read the the easement documents and everything else, there they were for the benefit of the underlying property owner.

Um happens to be the same property owner that uh owned the property.

I'm not so sure if uh Mr.

Grant was the original property owner of the entire thing or not, uh, but the original property owner that all of the spectrum parcels were created from.

Uh and so Washoe County actually purchased the property to the north, uh, in my mind, the benefiting property.

I suppose there are some properties even further north of that that could you know request an easement through this portion of the property, then they would also uh need to do what uh Mr.

Grant is uh requesting here is get an additional easement uh through Washa County on the property that is not encumbered by that easement.

Uh I I don't know if I'm being clear uh to answer your question or not, but but a portion of the property that Washa County sits on is encumbered by a blanket public utility easement, essentially meaning that they you know someone could put a public utility anywhere across there.

Underground.

Underground, correct.

The the question uh then becomes well, if you get to the edge of that easement, then what?

Um you know, you also need an easement to extend past that uh across the property that does not exist.

So um it's it's a little murky.

It's it's strange when you read the document because it just carved out this one little section for the benefit of the property of the north.

Uh Washa County actually owns that property uh as well.

So we created one big parcel for the public safety training center.

Thank you.

Any other questions.

I am just wondering.

We've certainly been hearing a lot about this over the last several years.

And I'm just wondering where the um the last information that we have, at least in the staff report is that on July 6th of 2025, the Public Safety Training Center Executive Board did not support this.

Was there any discussions with them or where are we at with that?

So we have been to the uh public safety training center executive board a couple of times with this project.

I think maybe three times in total over the the entire uh length we've been here.

Um as you will recall trying to think of when it was.

It might have been the August 23rd or August 2023 meeting.

We provided a letter from that board related to their concerns associated with this project.

That letter was part of the letter that we utilized to negotiate through uh some of the the terms that are within the development agreement that you see today.

So, for instance, one of the big concerns uh from uh that board was that uh in this day and age there's a real concern uh that people are uh fearful of gunshots, right?

You hear that and and in people uh anxiety, all of those types of things could occur.

Uh now, while you can uh mitigate those, as Mr.

Grant mentioned with the construction of the uh the apartments utilizing triple plane glass and some of those other sorts of things, uh there are other amenities outside.

And so the the fear or the concern, I guess is the bigger the better term of the board is they do uh shooting at that facility all the time.

You can drive up that road and you hear gunshots uh because they've got an outdoor range.

And so one of the concerns of the board is uh it's only a matter of time before the development project uh someone moves in there and petitions this board to stop shooting at that location.

That is a concern.

And so the you know, the way I I uh look at that is that is potential in interference with the use of the property in the future.

That is a decision that you you need to make whether that is a true statement or not.

Uh the access across the the parcel in times of an emergency.

My personal opinion is in times of emergency, we're probably not going to be training up there.

That impact is probably not a big deal.

So there are other impacts to the property uh that you you should consider.

Uh the executive board up there is is concerned about that impact to the uh we'll call it the quiet enjoyment of the property that Washa County has for the purposes of training uh our communities law enforcement and fire.

And just for legal clarity, the easement um is not um well, I'll do it.

I'm gonna answer the ask this question differently.

Um, if in fact the um sheriff's office wanted to proceed with a um indoor um range, which has been something they've been wanting to do for um quite some time.

Um and where does that fall in terms of the easement if we were to actually give the easement um well, we're not really giving it, but we're granting the opportunity to release that easement for this project.

Then what kind of jeopardy legally could there be for any permitting or anything that would restrict them from continuing in their long-term endeavor of having an indoor facility?

So the way we've negotiated this purchase and sale agreement is there's a compensation of $650,000 that could be put towards a couple of different things that are listed in the staff report.

One of those is in closing one of the bays for the uh for the shooting range to create an indoor location.

Uh, but there's nothing permitting wise that would that would be uh problematic for Washoe County uh to pursue that based on granting of this easing.

Yeah.

Long term or anything like that.

Is anyone from the sheriff's office here?

I don't believe so.

Guess not.

All right.

Um I am just gonna state that I still remain concerned about the public safety training center executive board who has been involved, and I appreciate the um negotiation and and the long-term discussions of trying to mitigate some of those concerns, but it feels that the concern is still there, uh, at least one of them.

And then I there was quite a list.

So kudos to y'all for going through the list and trying to um satisfy at least that executive board, but it seems that they have not changed their position overall.

Is is that a fair statement?

I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth.

Based on the last time we took this project to them for their review, uh, they they were not, they were all uh they were opposed to the to the granting of the easement.

Okay, thank you.

I'll go ahead and ask for any other questions.

I should probably make one additional.

Oh, sure, of course, please.

Um depending on what you all decide today, um, we'll go back, and the three partners that own the land will go back and they'll make a decision.

Are we doing 420 units?

Um, because we've got the ability to do that, or are we doing 200 units because we can do that now?

And it's a math question.

You know, does this return on equity warrant doing 200 units up there?

And uh, I don't know what the answer to that from the owner's perspective is gonna be.

Um, I think it's probably going to be well, let's do the engineering and let's lay it out.

Let's just do it.

I think that's probably the way this is gonna go.

You mean with the 200 units, just for clarification, I don't mean to interrupt you, you're talking about doing the analysis and the cost um we need to move some some roads on the property around.

We need to meet we just need to move some infrastructure around.

Without the easement without the easement, we can do it without the easement.

So this is there is a path where you're gonna have 200 units there anyway.

No, I hear you.

Is there is this something that you're thinking you're wanting to do?

Are you wanting to proceed with this item?

Are you wanting to actually look at um taking the vote, or do you wanting to come back?

Or I I just want to make sure I'm giving you the opportunity based on what you just said.

I think the landowners would like clarity because this has been dragging on for a long time.

I agree.

And the landowners would like to know are we doing 200 units or are we doing 420 units?

Yeah, fair enough.

Thank you.

I just wanted to give you an opportunity.

Thank you.

Do you have anything else?

Uh this is this issue weighs on me because uh I was very open when um this originally came to us and we were talking about housing and the need for housing in the area, and there's a lot of pressure, certainly on this board to look at an easement to double the housing in our region that well, not double the housing, but double the potential for a housing apartment housing complex in our region, and then also making a regional decision on a regional training complex and what that will affect.

Uh I was coming into this thinking, I don't know if I can uh do this.

Um because it's been uh a difficult process um with this board, and um I had disclosed that um a person who was related to this project had tried to see if they could um support my gubernatorial campaign for a vote for support of this project, and that's so it's personally left a really difficult taste in my mouth, and I know that's being investigated by the state, and I disclose this publicly, so um, but I also am like we need housing in the region and uh double of the housing with an easement.

I don't know why the easement has to go through the middle of the property.

I'm still very miffed about that.

We had an easement that was like gonna go around the property, and I'm still like, why aren't we doing that?

Um, and maybe Mr.

Solero can clarify that for me.

Um I respect our public safety folks, certainly, and um their concerns.

Um the issue I have is this would this property should have probably been purchased by the county if we didn't want anyone to develop it.

That's I have a hard time with that, but then they're guaranteed so many units uh by right without going through this easement issue, but man, do we need workforce housing?

But is there a guarantee of workforce housing on this property?

Not necessarily.

You can still charge whatever rents you want.

There's no uh limit on that.

And I know the last discussion we had as a board on this.

I had wanted to see that we were actually going to see it.

There was deed restricted housing to ensure that at least some of these units could be affordable.

So I'm having a hard time on what I want to do with this issue.

I I thought I was walking in saying like no to the to the easement, but I'm I'm going back and forth.

So I'm I'm sorry, madam chair, I'm still kind of uh thinking through this.

It's a tough decision.

It's a really tough decision.

And uh I think you know, as a board, we do we protect our assets.

I think that's really important.

We protect the county's assets.

Uh additionally, do we look at the region as a whole and how we can support that housing piece, especially because the developer has stepped up and wants to give us $650,000 to potentially create a solution that is still on the property today of there's in outdoor shooting and that is disruptive to the entire area, which we also have a uh a um a shelter for our our um animals there, you know.

Um so I'm I'm going back and forth um about that concern.

And I guess Mr.

Slero, if you could just again discuss with us and remind me as to why that easement has changed uh from I don't even know when we started discussing this, uh 2023.

So uh maybe even before then and it going around and what that why we can't necessarily like not have it go through the middle of this training facility when it's so hard to find land where the county can work with our partners and train together.

So I understand that that's also a concern.

I don't want it this coming back a decade later and being like the county didn't protect this asset.

So that would be helpful for me.

You bet for the record, uh assistant county manager Dave Solero.

Uh there were three proposed routes uh across the property based on engineering and and you know what what is possible.

Uh the route you're talking about, it actually kind of went down and parallel the long 395.

Um since we started that discussion, actually it was in the in the works uh as the discussion started, uh, but there has been a canine training facility built uh that in uh that interferes with that uh we'll call it the southern route for lack of a better better uh you know descriptor.

Um and so that left us with two additional routes.

One uh that is depicted in the in the presentation that I provided, the the red line that kind of snakes up the hill.

Uh the other one uh actually went uh further up to the right.

And if you're familiar with the facility, there's an outdoor uh uh uh circular track essentially, and it branched off that circular track and went up and around uh further to the north.

Um in working, you know, talking through and trying to negotiate them.

Remember the board and requested we would we try to negotiate something.

Um the the uh users of the facility said, well, if we have to do this, you know, the least impactful to us might be this one in the middle.

There's been some engineering and some other things.

Uh, I think there's some question whether uh, you know, the the layout actually works for um, you know, uh actual evacuations.

It is not a straight shot.

It's a you know, so there's some there's some questions there, but that is not our purview to determine that as a city Reno Fire Department's uh determination related to the the actual um usability of the route from what I understand.

Um, you know, the developers told us that yes, the city of Reno Fire Department has looked at the route and they don't have concerns, the same concerns that I might actually no, not the northern route, the one the one through the center.

It because it's kind of snakes up, it's it's got a couple of hairprint turns in it, um, just you know, trying to define if we need to evacuate people, and that's what this road is for.

You get a bunch of people on it.

How do you you know how do you actually utilize that?

But again, that is not my call.

That is the city of Reno uh fire department.

They're the ones the authority having jurisdiction uh on the the actual road layout itself.

Uh, we're simply here to determine whether uh this impacts our future use of the facility uh or and provides the benefit uh potential that you need to make the decision.

So hope that answered your question.

So the northern route is just not on the table.

So, or would that be a future discussion or I um based on where we're at?

I think that I think that is off the table right now.

I mean, it they they both go through the middle of the training props, right?

The northern route and the and the and the one we're we're talking about now.

They both impact the the training ground about the same way.

The other piece we were trying to work through in doing this was the least amount of impact during construction for this roadway as well.

And so the route that is chosen uh is seen generally as the least impactful to the training facility while construction is going on.

Uh, I think that's probably why it got uh preference rather than the northern northern route, which still again impacts uh a good portion of the training facility props.

Is there any benefit to the route to the um residents that it connects to the north out of curiosity in your opinion?

So both routes connect to Rajer Road.

Right.

So the so the so the connection doesn't matter.

And again, it's not uh I suppose at some point uh you know it could be utilized to evacuate um if we if need be the residents to the north through the training facility and out that way as well.

Uh this is not a one-way uh roadway.

Uh but since they both have the same access point, it would be the same impact to the to the community.

Um it's not like we're connecting at two different streets with the different routes that we're all taking to the same.

Sorry, but it regardless of the route.

Is there, I mean, you're saying potentially there's an evacuation plus of for the other residents potentially.

I understand.

If if we if we evacuate from the apartment complex through that neighborhood and out.

Um I don't I don't think either either route here makes an impact there.

There are very limited locations where uh an easement can go from the uh Ablican's property to anywhere north.

Um the the property to the to the east of this is um it's open space.

Uh it's very very difficult terrain.

I don't believe there's an avenue to get a roadway there.

Um so certainly um I would hope that the the city of Reno uh fire department as well is uh you know understanding of the additional impact of this emergency access into that neighborhood uh to the north.

Um to your point again, there are that neighborhood to the north, I believe, really only has one means of egress out of their back out as it's currently constructed today.

Yeah.

But we don't we haven't done any studies on whether that's necessary that they have another route or we have not.

Yeah.

Okay.

Anything else?

No.

Um, I I feel your struggle.

I mean, I too um we've all been dealing with this in terms of, and I can imagine your frustration, Mr.

Grant, in terms of having what appears to be a clear path of a project that got approved, and now finding that there's a barrier, if you will, based on having to come to the commission for an easement discussion.

That's really what this is.

And the struggle that I have with this is that I wish we could unring the bell in the sense of the city of Reno as an example, working um, you know, a little deeper on this before just giving a blanket approval because the easement is an option.

It's not something that we have to do, but at the same time, we have to balance what's up there.

That facility is up there.

And that's why I asked about where the executive board, because they do have um a deep uh regional look at how things should not only be right now, but also in the future.

And so I really remember our I didn't remember the three two you said that, Mr.

Slower, but I remember that there were these various easements, and there was even concerns with those.

So it's not that there's one even line that I am aware of that would make this um amenable to everyone.

So um I I am going to um support the fact that the professionals that are with the sheriff's office are taking this very seriously as well, and that I feel that the regional public safety executive board has um, even though they don't have authority, if you will, on this, they do have a say.

And I know that they have, along with the emergency management, the REOCs up there, um, the regional emergency operations center is up there.

I know that they're um collectively have spent a lot of time looking at various options.

I think it's great that you have um stepped into the role, Mr.

Grant, of being the face of this organization and the and the investors that are looking at this project, because um I too uh shared uh Commissioner Hill's experience, which I have shared with the investigation of a person willing to write a check when I was running an order for this.

I know that was then, but it is it's taken some very interesting twists and turns.

What's before us is the facts, and the facts are that it looks like you, Mr.

Solero and the team have gone through along with Mr.

Grant and your investors, an immense amount of time and energy, but I am not going to support this.

I just am going to be very clear based on what we've had in the past.

Um, that has not changed, even though the list has narrowed, the list is not complete from the public safety executive board.

And I think if there were a possibility of another easement that everyone could agree on, I think we might be in a different place.

But I feel honest that I feel I need I need to be transparent with you.

And I hope that you're respectful of the fact that we've all been trying to make this work.

And I know that you have all people want to make this work.

So it is a struggle, as you've heard, because we're also looking at housing as being a number one priority in our community, and um you've been offering that, even though um to the point of a free market, you have the ability to um have those units uh priced as you see fit.

So I'm not asking for anything on that, by the way.

So if there isn't any other questions or discussion or need for clarification, um, this is an actionable item, and I'm gonna ask if there's any public comment at this time.

There is none.

Thank you.

Anything else?

All right.

Any any final words, Mr.

Grant?

Uh, just two things.

Sure.

Just to repeat the the 200 unit project could go forward if the investors choose to.

And it really the math is actually very simple.

It's about $300 more per month per unit in rent.

It's just kind of calculates really pretty easily.

And on the untoward behavior on a prior person involved in the product project.

When it comes to my reputation, I am ruthless.

That person's been terminated.

And whatever happens, happens.

Don't have any involvement with that person any longer.

Thanks for that clarification.

We appreciate that.

And please don't think that any comments are directed to you or any of the investors.

That's not our intent.

Thank you.

All right.

Well, we're gonna call for a motion at this time.

I don't know who would like to do that, either Commissioner Herman or Commissioner Hill.

Or I will do it.

Okay.

I'm gonna go ahead and move that we um not move forward with the project.

Um move to not approve an easement purchase and sell agreement between Washoe County, the Grantor, and Dandini Spectrums Holding LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Corporation grantee DSH.

Second.

So I have a motion by myself and a second by Commissioner Hill.

All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Nay.

All right.

The motion does not carry.

So um I will look to you, Ms.

Gussipson.

Um, yes, so for under NRS 241.0355, because this board is composed of all elected officials, you do need a majority of the total board membership for any motion to carry, which in because we only have three members present, that would require unanimous um uh approval for any motion to carry.

Uh, you're it's at your discretion to call for another motion if you prefer or not.

You know, I'll call for the motion, but I do want clarification on one point if I could at this time.

Um, what would end up happening if it if it ends up being in the same uh result as it is right now?

Then then uh if there was a motion to approve it, and that motion did not get a three-zero vote, then that motion would also fail.

So you would have both motions would fail, and no action would be taken on this item.

Great.

I just wanted to get that clarified.

Um we can try it again.

So I my motion is going to remain the same that I'm going to move to not approve as I just stated.

That's my motion.

Second.

So we have a motion and a second.

All those in favor of the motion not to approve.

Signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Ay.

So motion remains two one.

So we are going to end the round.

And thank you, Mr.

Grant.

And it might be a great opportunity to look at what those costs might pencil out.

Maybe something will happen in a miracle way for construction costs to somehow just be so affordable for not only Nevada but the whole country.

So thank you so much.

Thank you for you know your clarity and your candor and your integrity.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

All right, we're going to close item 10.

And we're going to move now to the block vote.

And just as um a reminder, um Vice Chair Garcia is not on the line.

So Commissioner Hill, would you be so kind to do the block vote?

Absolutely.

I uh move to block vote 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21.

Thank you.

Are there any questions or any clarification on any of these items?

Uh oh, wait, once you get a second, I have a comment.

Okay.

I'm gonna ask for public comment though.

Okay.

Okay.

Do we have any public comment?

I'm checking all the items.

There is nobody signed in for any of them in block.

Thank you so much.

All right.

I am do you have a second or did you second it?

I I didn't make the motion.

Do you want to make it?

I made the motion.

Oh, I'll second it.

Okay.

Thank you.

We'll get it straight.

I just I've been dealing with nuisance properties in my district, and I just commend the staff for trying to look at ways that we can um have parity with Reno and Sparks on these issues when folks do not manage their properties properly.

And I'm hoping that item 16 uh really makes a difference, and I can't wait to um let my constituents know who are concerned about these properties that we're looking at um higher steeper fees and fines for these type of actions.

That's all.

No, I I agree, and I'll just echo the point.

I I think we need to give Vice Chair Garcia the recognition she deserves on working on all those nuisance properties that have really moved not only what we just approved in terms of the nuisance code.

I met with enforcement as well.

I think we all in our own districts have seen this and being able to strengthen that for our community is to be commended.

So thank you, Vice Care, Vice Chair Garcia.

Thank you to the entire staff for looking at how we can strengthen this, and hopefully we'll see an immediacy in um some of the gaps that have been in place.

Thank you.

All right, we're gonna go ahead and move then to item 11.

We didn't vote on it.

Oh, we did.

Oh, we didn't.

No, we didn't.

I'm sorry.

That's okay.

We just were having a conversation.

We were having a conversation.

I was just gonna have a conversation.

I'm so sorry.

No worries.

So um, any further discussion?

All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries for the block as presented unanimously.

Thank you.

All right.

We'll now move to item 11.

Manager Thomas.

Thank you.

Item 11 is an update discussion and direction to staff regarding potential bill draft requests for the 84th session of the Nevada legislature.

The subjects of the potential BDRs or bill draft requests to be considered are included on the agenda.

And the board and we will have a presentation to walk through those.

So the board may direct staff to pursue these BDRs on one or more of the subjects or bring back other possible concepts on subjects that the board identifies as being in the best interest of the county for approval at a future meeting.

We are joined this afternoon by Caden Smotievic who will walk us through those items.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Commissioners.

For the record, my name is Caden Smithievich, and I have the privilege of serving as government affairs liaison for Washa County.

Um, this will be our second discussion in this legislative interim regarding bill draft requests.

You'll recall that I was first before you in March of this year, um, and you gave some direction then.

So I'll provide some updates today and look for additional direction from me from you as we move very quickly towards the deadline for submission of our bill draft requests for this session.

I won't spend a lot of time on this.

We discussed this before, but just for anyone who may be reviewing this in the future, there is the statutory authority regarding bill draft requests and a visual of where we are in the process.

As I said, we move very quickly.

We've got about six weeks left until we reach the deadline for submission of BDRs that have been allocated to Washoe County.

There are different deadlines for different entities that are authorized to submit bill drafts.

And so while this is our final opportunity, there are other entities that have the authorities to submit bill draft requests further, actually, even after the legislative session has begun.

And so I want to be clear that while today I would be seeking your direction on bill draft requests that we would be submitting or others that they kind of fall into two categories, some that would be required for that September deadline, and others that may continue beyond that.

As I shared with you when we first discussed this earlier this year, as we look at BDR considerations, we take into account a number of different things.

Those are outlined there in the interest of time.

I will not go through them again, but happy to answer questions when we get to the conclusion of the presentation.

So an update on proposal number one that was brought before you in March.

This would require a local government that submits an erroneous billing file to a county treasurer to reimburse the county for any expenses that the county incurs as a result of the errors contained in that billing file.

This board directed me to submit that item to the Nevada Association of Counties Legislative Committee for consideration that that concept be taken up as a NACO.

That's the acronym for that organization, BDR.

We are awaiting determination from NACO as to whether or not the item will be submitted.

They are authorized to submit five bill draft requests.

They have eight concepts that are under consideration, and it is expected that their board of directors will potentially take action on that at their July 31st meeting.

And so I can come back and provide an update to this board on August 25th as to where the association of counties, assuming their board of directors, does take action on the 31st.

I can update you then on that item.

You'll see when we get to the recommendations that at this point, my recommendation would be to leave this filed with NACO, but if that they do not take it up, that we consider submitting this as one of our own.

Following that direction, I went out and spoke with potential sponsors and other stakeholders.

And based on the feedback that I received during that process, that there are a number of other things happening regionally that are under consideration now around dispatch and other things that may impact the way that these services are provided in the community, that those folks felt like it was premature for this to come forward and that perhaps some of those other efforts would result in efficiencies that might help re reduce the administrative burden.

And so at this point, I would no longer recommend that you pursue this BDR, and we'll be asking when we get to recommendations, we'll be recommending that you rescind the prior direction.

Proposal number three has to do with equity and authority for and distribution of transient lodge taxes and surcharge revenues collected in the Washoe County portion of the Lake Tahoe Basin for the purpose of establishing a dedicated funding source for public transit to from and within the portion of the Lake Tahoe Basin located in our county.

Your board directed uh that we submit this item to the committee, the legislative committee for the review and oversight of the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency and the Marlett Lake Water System, and the recommendation was submitted to the committee consistent with the board's direction.

I will say that we've had quite a lot of discussion with the chair of that committee and other stakeholders.

Your recommendations were submitted as they were approved by this board.

We were not specific about a dollar amount in a surcharge or percentage of existing revenues to allow the stakeholders and the committee discretion there.

So it may it may be that that's different, and I'll look forward to providing you an update with that at your August 25th meeting.

You wished for me to inquire as to whether a bill regarding automatic recounts of elections similar to Assembly Bill 287 of the 2025 legislative session is likely to return in the 2027 session.

At this time, I am not aware of any intent.

This topic was not considered by the joint interim standing committee on legislative operations and elections, and I am not aware of any individual legislator that is looking to bring that item forward.

On March 21st, or excuse me, April 21st, during uh one of your strategic planning workshops, uh when you were receiving a presentation from our public administrator, there was some discussion regarding the possibility of the functionality and access to the Nevada lockbox to be expanded to include a state document such as last will and testaments.

Umsequent to that meeting, uh public administrator uh Klitzke and I uh have had discussion with the Secretary of State's office, um, and they were very receptive to uh to our interests in seeing that those discussions continue.

Um, they did indicate uh the the secretary of state is entitled to bill draft requests and that it could potentially be a bill draft incorporated into one of their bill drafts.

Those can those discussions are ongoing, um, and we'll discuss it further when we get to the recommendation as to whether or not this board might want to hold one of your BDRs or just continue those discussions and let that be a decision of the secretary given that this is a program of his state of his uh department.

Uh one correction to make here.

I have that last item identified as June 26th.

It's actually June 23rd.

My apologies for that error.

Um, the board expressed interest in exploring legislative remedies to allow the county to act more expeditiously to remediate uh pervasive public nuisances, particularly on properties where known known owners could be identified.

Um, assemblymember Heather Goulding has indicated uh a willingness and desire to carry a bill on this topic.

Um, and I have been working with the district attorney's office and our community services department on preparing some recommendations for her uh that could be uh could could form the substance of a bill.

Um, as you well know, um many of the current situations that we're dealing with are in Sun Valley, and that happens to be her legislative district.

Um so an opportunity there for her to carry that on our behalf and on behalf of uh the constituents in that district.

Uh, sorry, I need to back up one more.

Um, what I don't have on this slide is that actually on the 26th of June, um Commissioner Hill, I believe you inquired uh when the county when the board was considering uh the declaration of state of emergency following the terrible uh circumstances with the hidden valley flash flooding, you had asked whether or not there was a possible legislative remedy to some of the concerns that had been raised with respect to insurance policies.

I've done some research, um, and while not a legal opinion, um my research leads me to believe that at the state level there is not likely to be much that could be addressed legislatively.

Um, as this board may know, the majority of flood policies issued in our country and in certainly in our county are through the national flood insurance program that is administered by FEMA.

You may purchase them through your local or whomever you carry your homeowners' insurance through.

But because that program is largely structured through a federal program, uh oversight is somewhat limited at the state level.

Um there are other types of policies, surplus policies that are available that could fall within the jurisdiction of the state, but um given the nature of those policies, typically oversight is somewhat limited.

Um, and so at this time it is it is my belief that there is not a likely substantial or significant remedy to be had at the state level.

I wanted to provide that information for you.

And so um with that, I have uh four recommendations for you, um, and then we'll seek your input and direction on any other topics.

So the first um would be that um contingent upon the association of counties not selecting this item as a be as one of their BDRs that we would submit as our own uh the requirement that local governments uh repay counties for any costs incurred as a result of erroneous billing files that they remitted uh to rescind the prior direction to seek a sponsor or to submit as one of our own BDRs uh amendments to allow a maximum of three percent of those revenues from the surcharge uh the 911 telephone surcharge uh for the reasons that I covered uh to direct us to continue discussions with the Secretary of State's office regarding types of uh documents eligible to be filed in the lockbox and the entities authorized to access them and to return to the board in August to uh seek to to provide an update on those discussions, and then uh to continue to work with assembly member Boulding regarding a BDR uh to allow for local governments to expedite abatement of public nuisances under circum certain circumstances.

And that concludes my update and presentation, Madam Chair.

Um happy to answer any questions on the information I provided or to take further direction uh or questions that you may have.

Thanks.

Appreciate it.

Um I am actually going to ask for public comment before we go into any discussion.

Do we have any public comment?

We do.

We have Andy Chapman Sound.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair and Commissioners.

Thank you for your time today.

Uh it is in the afternoon, I see.

So my name is Andy Chapman.

I'm the president CEO of Travel North Tahoe, Nevada.

We are the official destination management organization for the Washotaho portion of the basin, of which uh you guys have oversight as the jurisdictional oversight.

Um we currently do get a percentage of the the uh TOTs that are collected in our regions come back to our region.

What we have found is Tahoe is in a new reality, and I know Commissioner Hill understands us very well, being from that district as well, and the work you had all done.

But how we manage the destination is critical, and how we manage the destination has changed.

What we do know is the current collection of funds that come back to our organization to reinvest back into our community in the environment, into the community and into the uh the business economy is not enough for the job at hand.

Things have changed since the pandemic.

We have a lot of people traveling up to Tahoe.

There's a lot of demands on Tahoe, and there's a recognition that we need to look at how we manage Tahoe differently.

I do want to applaud this commission for looking at the particular two BDRs that I'm speaking of, which is the surcharge and the redistribution of the current TOT collections, as well as working with your staff on this uh to work collaboratively with the stakeholders uh that we have been working with as well.

We have been interested in these discussions for some time.

This is one of the various strategies that are being considered.

Another is a business improvement district bill that we are bringing forward uh in the 2027 session as well, and it will take many tools to manage the the district as we have seen it seen it here.

But really, it is how are we looking to invest in transit enhancements, user mitigation, downtown beautification, and economic vitality.

We do know again the way that the uh current uh the funding works, it is not sufficient to do the job.

So we do applaud the efforts being done here, and I thank you for your time and commitment and your staff's time and commitment as well.

So thank you.

Thank you.

There's nobody else signed in.

Thank you.

Ms.

Mateovic.

Thank you for putting this together.

And I just want to clarify that I serve as the chair of the NACO legislative board, and as Ms.

Mateavich clearly indicated, July 10th was our meeting as a committee that has submitted the priorities and the staff are working through everything and we'll be presenting what there are eight bills, so there'll be five, and those five will be presented to the full NACO board at the end of July at their July meeting.

And I do really appreciate the deadline because it is here, essentially.

It's here.

And so although there's always a lot of work that needs to be done, and things do come up, you never can tell what might be a surprise.

But at the same time, just the planning and the research and the vetting and this discussion is appreciated for all of the work that you've done and the continued work you will be doing.

So thank you.

So having said that, I'll just open it up to questions or comments.

Do you have anything?

Miss Hill.

Uh yes, I have to reiterate what the chair has just said, Miss Mateovich.

You've been amazing uh working with you on these Tahoe issues, and I know that you're even trying to work with our partners on the business improvement district as much as we can coordinate and ensure that um these bills are successful, or at least one of these bills will be successful so we can ensure that we have proper revenues to take care of the gem of our region, which is Lake Tahoe.

So thank you so much.

And you've been so wonderful and vetting these other things that come up that I shoot you emails on and ask you questions on, and even following the board meetings and seeing oh, you know, this was mentioned, let's go follow up on this and um seeing what you could do on the lockbox already with the Secretary of State without us having to remember and bringing it back to the board.

Thank you so much.

That it's just really great work and what I've been looking for in this position.

So you've just been um wonderful to work with, and I really appreciate your dedication and um and just doggedness, um, which we have to do.

Um even though the legislature only meets every two years, we gotta dog our issues or else they won't happen because these are all really important to us.

Uh I don't have additional concerns that I want to bring right now as far as the um counting commission, but I'm really excited for the session to start and to get the updates and um hear what what else is floating out there and how we can participate and uh I just really appreciate all your work.

So thank you very much, and I'm willing to support your recommendations as they stand today.

Thank you, madam chair.

Commissioner Herman, do you have anything?

I just wanted to thank give thanks to our presenter, our lady here that does such such a wonderful job for us.

I have enjoyed working with her for the last many years, and and uh and she's so good at getting things organized for us and and sorting out all the things that we bring to her that probably just I don't have any possibilities, and and those that are important to the majority of the people of our county.

So thank you once again.

Thank you, Commissioner Herman.

And the respect that you have at the legislature should not be ignored, and even the association is in terms of me always bring up NACO, but there are many other organizations that have an immense amount of respect for your integrity for your hard work, and that is really carrying Washoe County, and so thank you for that very much, really.

Thank you.

I too am gonna support your recommendation, and given that there isn't any additional public comment, I'll entertain a motion at this time.

I'm sorry, was there a particular motion or can I just say as outlined in the staff report?

Uh yes, uh direct staff to submit the Washoe County BDR uh as outline BDRs that's outlined in this staff report.

All right, second.

Oh, there you go.

Okay.

So we have a motion and a second to recommend or to accept the recommendations best based on Miss Matiad Vich.

Any uh further discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

It's some rest now.

All right.

We're now going to move to item number 12.

Can we take a break after the item 12?

Do you want to take a break now?

That would be great.

Okay, I think we're going to take a break.

See, somebody asked, we get 125.

We're going to take a ten minute break.

We're gonna call this meeting back to order at one forty four.

Thank you for everyone's patience.

We'll now move to item twelve.

Oh, Commissioner Herman.

Are you there?

Commissioner Herman, are you there?

I am here.

This, if introduced, will be bill number 1956 to adopt a development agreement for Woodland Village Town Center, WTM 20-005 to extend the deadline for recording the final map to May 20th of 28.

Thank you.

And that was Bill 1956.

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you.

Do we have any public comment?

There is none.

Do we have any desire for any additional information on this?

Commissioner Herman, do you have any questions on this?

No.

Thank you.

Okay, I'll entertain a motion for bill number 1956.

Move to introduce bill number 1956 as outlined in the staff report with uh second reading coming August 25th, 2026.

Thank you so much.

All right, we'll close item 12.

We'll now move to item 13, another introduction and first reading.

If introduced, this will be bill number 1957 to adopt a development agreement for registration at Hunter Creek, TM 16-005 to extend the deadline for recording the final map to June 28th, 9th or 2028.

Great.

Do we have any public comment?

There is none.

Thank you.

Do we have any requests for additional information?

Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion.

Move to uh introduce bill number 1957 and schedule the second reading for the ordinance at on August 25th, 2026, as outlined in the staff report.

Thank you.

All right, we'll go ahead and close item 13.

We'll now move to item 22, which is a second reading.

This will be ordinance number 1764 and ordinance amending the Washoe County Code at Chapter 110 Development Code Article 408 by applying the findings that reference site specific characteristics only when those characteristics are present on the parcels in question to ensure the design flexibility and associated public benefits inherent to common open space developments.

Development is potentially available to all subdividable parcels.

Those formerly bill number 1955.

Thank you.

Do we have any public comment?

There is none.

Do either of the commissioners wish to hear additional information.

This is a second reading.

Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion at this time.

Move to adopt bill number 1955, an ordinance amending Washoe County Code Chapter 11, uh as outlined in the staff report.

And that's recording 1764.

Ordinance 1764.

I I heard that.

Okay.

I'll second the commission.

Oh, we have a second by no Commissioner Herman, please.

So we have a motion by Commissioner Hill and a second by Commissioner Herman.

Any further discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries unanimously.

We'll now move to item 23.

Manager Thomas.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

This is your final 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.

Unused time may not be allocated to other speakers.

And please make your comments to the commission as a whole.

Thank you.

First up, we have Diana Christensen.

I'm here today to make a formal request of this honorable commission.

After the recent Spanish Springs Cab meeting, I was inspired to address the commission in regards to about 200 acres of agriculturally zoned properties in Spanish Springs on Pyramid Highway between Calle de La Plata and all Alamosa Drive.

After the change in the master plan a couple of years ago, there is interest and interest in changing the zoning of a portion of these properties to industrial.

Even though the master plan just says 22 acres of warehousing, the developer is seeking 80 or 90 acres of industrial in the first proposal.

All properties are adjacent.

I don't see anyone else wanting to use that acreage for anything else once industrial zoning is approved.

These properties all border on housing that has been approved by the previous county commissions and built over the last 20 years when all industrial was limited to the west side of Pyramid Highway.

The Spanish Springs Business Center on the west side of Pyramid Highway was approved about 25 years ago before most of the housing out that far was approved.

Many of us looked at this as proof that industrial zoning would stay on the west side of Pyramid Highway.

Decisions for purchasing homes were made with the belief that this decision would stand.

Now the developers are seeking seeking properties on the east side of the highway as a prime location.

This would put the industrial industry against the fence of many homeowners.

This would greatly impact the approximate 2,000 homeowners who believed the previous master plan.

From the businesses that have moved into Spanish Springs Business Center, we have learned about good neighbors and poor neighbors.

If a zoning change is approved, similar businesses will be moving over to our side of the highway.

I understand that we need more jobs and revenue.

However, I would request a review of the current industrial zoning code.

I would like to see more stringent noise, light, and hours of operation restrictions in a revised industrial zoning code since there are existing houses adjacent to the proposed acreage for rezoning.

There is great difference between the braying of donkeys and a factory that runs major noisy equipment 24 7, 365 days a year, OSHA required backup beepers at 4 a.m.

and warehouses that may operate three shifts.

There are also many compatible businesses.

The previous commissioners thought businesses and homes could coexist.

I do too.

That means in this case, only one row of houses.

Thank you.

There's nobody else signed in, but I do have emails to submit for the record.

Thank you.

We'll go ahead and close public comment and now move to item 24, Manager Thomas.

This is your commissioner's county manager's announcements, reports, and updates to include board and commission updates, requests for information or topics for future agendas.

Do you have anything?

I do not.

Commissioner Hill.

Commissioner Herman, do you have anything?

No, I don't.

Thank you so much for your patience being online too.

I don't have anything as well, so we're going to go ahead and adjourn at 152.

Thank you so much.