Board of Commissioners - Regular Meeting

All right, good afternoon. It's a little after 1.30 here on Wednesday, July 1st, 2026. And before I forget, I want to wish everybody a happy 250th birthday to our great nation. So I don't want to forget that. For the record, let the record show that Commissioner Carr is absent. Commissioner Steninger is joining us via Zoom or somehow electronically. At this time, I'd like to ask everybody to stand and ask Jillian to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you so very much for that. I appreciate it. Okay, we'll be moving on to item number C, which is comments by the general public. Comments by the general public pursuant to NRS 241. This time is devoted to comments by the general public. If any in discussion of those comments, no action may be taken upon a matter raised under this item until the matter itself has been specifically included on a successive agenda and identified to be an action item. Do we have any public comment? Come on up and please state your name for the record.

Good afternoon. Annette Kerr, Elko Convention and Visitors Authority. Just a real quick update on Mining Expo. We reported last month what those numbers were previously. So in 2026, we were up by 9% to 7,400 visitors. And hotel occupancy was up 6.9% for the month of June. And hotel revenues were up 12.9% for the month of June as well. I do want to let you know that we went from 360 booths that we sold to 406 booths total, and some of those had double booths, but it's a 12% increase. This year we did mining poetry. It went over really well for the very first time. It had some great stories, some funny ones, some sad ones, remembering people that had been at the mines. And we also did a podcast for the very first time, and with Mining Minds, their podcast. So we did also, people could call in questions and view live, do a Q&A and discussions via podcast. Website as well or an app and we had 226 people submit questions and want to get in on the discussion that weren't even in The theater at the time so that was that was really great Additionally we had an economic impact increase of 10% over last year for 1.55 That's fantastic. Thank you. Oh, I did want to share that we had people from Saudi Arabia was the furthest and well in Australia and

Is the Mining Poetry posted somewhere, or are there some highlights?

I'll talk to Mining Minds. They're the ones who did put that on for us, and I'll see what they've got. But I know they haven't released their podcast yet either. They usually run about 2,500 to 3,500 people that once they're downloaded, they'll get that hit. So I think they're still putting everything together, but I'll check with them.

It'll be fun to see some highlights.

It was fun. It was really fun.

Well, you know, being the liaison from the commission to that board, I can attest to the amount of work and energy that goes into not only this but all the events, but this is by far and away. You're either in Mining Expo or you're planning for Mining Expo or you're cleaning up for Mining Expo. There's three seasons of Mining Expo, right? So, you know, just from my perspective, I think. Thank you and all the fine folks at the convention center, the e-center for everything you do, and I thank all the vendors for coming here, and I hope they felt the charm and hospitality of northeastern Nevada.

Well, they loved it, especially the golf tournament as well. 576 players, and we were asked to add a third day, and I told them no. Not yet. So thank you very much. Thanks.

Any other public comment? Yes. Name for the record, please.

My name is Michael Stevens. I'm here representing Beck Construction right now. I'm here to talk to you guys about the timeline of the 2024 building code adoption. I'm guessing the commission adopted that code in January, I believe, and to be set into motion around the 3rd of July for having all plans submitted for the 2024 building code. I wasn't aware of this. about this word of mouth through our design professional in April. I immediately called our building official, Jess Phillips. He said, yes, we are adopting the 2024 code. It is going to be put into effect in the beginning of July. I then immediately went in. I called a couple of other contractors, asked them if they knew about it. They had not been notified of that either. And I guess a little of that is on us, right? Because we should probably be paying attention to the county community. to the agenda items and so on and so forth. But being as that we're pretty busy with other things, the 2024 code adoption had slipped our minds. So just to put this into perspective, the other local building department, they adopted the 2024 code this year. We had over a year heads up. We had multiple workshops on that 2024 building code adoption. They give us a year heads up. They give us a six month grace period to get all of our plans in. As you guys mostly know, Beck Construction relies heavy on their master reuse plans because we are a production builder. The issues that we're having is I was made aware of this with the two and a half month notice for Elko County. And we're fighting right now with the NDEP and multiple other government jurisdictions in Spring Creek and other properties that we have for water meter pits. And it's a really long, drawn out process to even get prepared to submit a set of plans or submit for a permit right now. And we, as hard as we worked, our design professional was not able to get any of our master plans updated for Elko County. We have them updated for the other building jurisdiction, but the problem is they've adopted other parts of the code than the Elko County, so it's really having a huge effect on us right now. We're trying to get some permits pulled. It's just there wasn't enough time given. There wasn't enough grace given for us. Right now, we currently have 12 master reuses in Elko County Building Department. And like I said, we rely on those heavily. We're working really hard right now to get all of our water meter pits through NDEP for our Spring Creek properties. And we're trying to get everything submitted to Elko County. And there's just not enough time. We are respectfully asking the Commission to add an agenda item to next month's meeting to consider granting builders a three-month grace period before the 2024 code becomes mandatory for plan submittals. We would also ask for emergency or temporary measures the Commission could implement right away that would allow for plans to currently on file under the 2020 codes to continue to be accepted. I don't know if this is a possibility, but like I said, I talked to other contractors. I feel like we're set apart from the other contractors in the community. We're one of the only people that do production building in Elko County. So not a lot of these other builders have master reuses, and they definitely don't have the master reuse

You know as much as we do so I'm just asking for some grace right there if there's anything you guys could do to help us I would really appreciate it so a couple of things obviously first of all it's not on the agenda today, so we can't take right, but I'm asking for it to be understood so Curtis I thought it was my understanding that we notified all the contractors that we were doing this and

We held a open house back in October of last year, which is where it first came up. Some of the contractors asked us to come to this updated code. And then we put it on the January agenda. And then I think a, I don't have the date in front of me, but a notification went out from the building department in April. that it was coming up.

And that notification went to?

It was kind of from the building department to the contractors on our list there.

And then let me just ask you a quick question. To me, a grace period really is an administrative decision. I don't think it's necessarily something that has to come to the commission. Do you think that that's something administratively we could do to afford a grace period to get people A little bit of time to adjust to the new code.

So the resolution that we did back in January has the new code starting on July 3rd. And there wasn't anything in there that I saw that kind of allowed me or Jess to allow a grace period. I'm okay if you guys do, if you want to. take a look at that and Mess with it, but the resolution as it stands kind of didn't allow for for that It allowed a grace period sort of backwards so people Because the city was coming online With their new code adoption, it allowed people to start submitting for the 2024 codes starting in February. We would accept the 2018 or 2024 codes, and then we phased out the 2018 by July 3rd.

Well, and for me, you know, I mean, I think we're unfortunately a little stuck with the resolution. We could probably do it at the next meeting, but to me, I don't, you know, I think that We certainly don't want to create any unnecessary barriers. I mean, that is not the intent. In fact, when you mentioned NDEP, I'm hoping that water issue as it relates to fire has been resolved because I spent a lot of personal, is it still going on? If you can give me specifics, I'll make sure that that's taken care of. I'll make sure it's taken care of. So please give me the specifics of what you're dealing with, okay? But anyway, The resolution is we don't have it on the agenda. We can't undo it now. So maybe we get that back at the next meeting. And I apologize for the delay. The intent isn't to penalize you. As I recall, it was the... I don't know who they are, but obviously someone came to us and said, hey, we want you to be in conjunction with the City of Elko. That obviously makes sense. So, but I think a grace period is something we can certainly consider.

Yep, and we're totally for the 2024 code. We want all of our plans across the board, and we want to see Elko County adopt the new upcoming codes. I mean, the thing of it is, is like, I was actually never sent anything by the building department and a month ago nathan had received a notice from jess phillips that we were adopting it so we actually never got noticed until a month ago like i said i heard by word of mouth through our design professional so that's um you know that's still that's the only thing we're just a little communication if we had had a prior three months man we'd already been on it so that's that's fair enough i i don't i again i don't think it was an intention so i i apologize on behalf of the county and

See if we can't get that resolution back, Curtis, and see if the commission would consider giving him an additional grace period. Thank you. Thanks, Mike. Yep. Thank you for your time.

I appreciate it. Yep. We'll put that on the agenda for July 15th. Okay. Thanks.

Okay. Is there any other public comment? All right. Moving on to appointments. D1 discussion, consideration of approval of an appointment to serve on the Elko County Fair Board for a term expiring on December 31st, 2026. The appointment member will serve in a position responsible for assisting with the planning, coordination, and production of the Elko County Fair, including oversight of vendors, the carnival concessions, and fairground vendors. So we do have two applications and the fair board, reviewed both those applications. I know them both. Valerie D'Asto and also Michelle Cromwell, who's with the ECBA. The Fair Board is recommending Michelle Cromwell. Is there anybody else to talk about this, or what's the commission's appetite with this one?

Mr. Chairman, I have a motion.

Yeah, go ahead. You know, I see Michelle here. I don't see Valerie here. I don't see her. But that's okay. If you want to make a motion, go ahead.

Yes, I move to approve the appointment of Michelle Cromwell to the fair board as listed in D1. I have a motion.

I'll second. And a second. Is there any other discussion? If Michelle's here, can she introduce herself?

Michelle Cromwell from... The convention center and I have lived in Elko for 18 years I've been doing para mutual for the last two years at me Fairgrounds I grew up on a racetrack my dad was a jockey and a trainer I do events and promoting and so I'm excited to be part of the fair board team Thank you for being here.

Thank you for all your service to the fair board Your application was

Very enticing.

Thank you.

Yes, very good. Thank you. Another thing, I'd like to make sure that Valerie D'Asto knows that we want her to serve somewhere else.

No, absolutely. That's absolutely a great point. There's lots of opportunities for citizens to volunteer on a number of boards. We appreciate the interest that we get. Unfortunately, we only have one slot. Valerie, if you're watching out there somewhere, Please, there's lots of other areas to serve, and please consider other opportunities, or there may be another vacancy on the fair board as well. Okay. Thanks. Any other public comment as this is an action item? Thanks, Michelle. Any public comment on this item? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. And I vote aye also. Oh, Rex. Aye from Rex. Sorry, Rex. I knew you were there. Vote is four to zero, approved. D2 is tabled, infrastructure plan review. That'd be way past 135. Pursuant to notice 202631, discussion consideration of approval of the roads infrastructure tax plan for fiscal year 2027. So for the... for the board's information, we've got the historical plan that's been in here. Staff has worked on kind of an updated plan, which is in here as well. I'll just say the updated plan, I like that version a little bit better because it kind of goes into the explanation, you know, just a little bit of detail about how, what, where, and how we got there and where, you know, there's nothing wrong with the other one. It's just very, Straightforward, but I like I like the historical perspective of the of the new proposed draft.

So Dennis go ahead Dennis price Elko County Road superintendent, so this is our annual update on our infrastructure tax plan I don't know if you have any specific questions on any of the items for this next year I Don't have any do you guys have any?

Travis

I WOULD JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, SINCE THIS HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED TEN YEARS, IT AUGMENTS OUR ROAD FUND, AND WE'VE DONE A LOT OF GREAT WORK WITH THIS. SO, YEAH, I'VE GOT TO GO.

NEW SPEAKER. MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS BRAX.

NEW SPEAKER.

I was just curious to ask, it shows $2 million of income for 2026 and $2.9 million in expenditures, and the same for 2027, a $1.8 million deficit. So how do we make up that deficit?

So Rex, this is Amanda. There have been years where we've not spent the entire revenue. And so there does build somewhat of a fund balance for the roads department specifically, especially in the first couple of years while we were collecting, we weren't spending it. So there is still a balance on top of what we get in our annual revenue from that infrastructure.

That's quite a beginning fund balance. And then we overspend by,

one million this year and almost two million next year so we got quite a little nest egg there huh there is a fund balance for sure yes all right all right thank you it might be a good idea to put any fund balance on there so just so it can be seen but you know again i as i recall this this fund generates about for this particular about two and a half million dollars a year if i remember right

Yeah, it's increased a little year over year. When we first started the infrastructure tax, we anticipated about $3.5 million, and that has increased to just about $4 million now. So what we do, however, is $500,000 comes right out of the top and goes to the cities. As you can see, that's allocated here in the plan, and then we split that 50-50 between the public safety infrastructure tax and the roads. We try to allocate about 1.5 and still maintain a little bit of a balance in that fund to each of those. Thanks.

Yeah, so question, Dennis, about the skid steer. As I understand, under Equipment 2027.

Let's use this other one, Dennis.

Okay, there you are. That was it.

It's just a little easier to read, I think.

Oh, okay. So rather than buy one, what, self-propelled sweeper, rather than, yeah, rather than one $400,000 street sweeper, You're planning on getting a skid steer with multiple attachments. Can you tell us about that?

Yeah, so like you pointed out, the original idea was to buy an actual street sweeper, which those can run up around $400,000. Domo and I spoke about it, and at this time, we don't really... need an actual street sweeper. Those are really good for cities and places where you have curb gutter, sidewalks, storm drains, things of that nature. So we can accomplish pretty much everything we need with two smaller units. So the one is a self-propelled broom. So we can broom off our rural roads. There's no curb and gutter, or very little. We have a couple areas where we do have some curb and gutter. That's where the skid steer with the pickup broom attachment comes into play. So we can go into those areas and we can actually pick that debris up and load it and get it out of there. But also having that skid steer. So we're looking at the pickup room attachment. We're also looking at a possible mower attachment. And then basically it's a crusher attachment that attaches to that unit. So we can go out on our rural roads where we have rock outcroppings and we can grind those down And the attachment I'm looking at, we can grind them down about six inches deep. So wherever we have like boulders and stuff poking out of the top of the surface, we'll be able to grind that surface back down and turn that material into something that we can use.

So when you regrade the roads, the gravel roads every year, rather than pulling up boulders, you just grind them down.

Yeah. Yeah. And with this unit, I should be able to. Like you'll see in some areas, we'll have windrows of larger rock along the edge of the road. We'll be able to pull those windrows in and grind that up and turn it into usable material. So we'll be able to take these two pieces of equipment and use them in multiple areas, multiple locations. And so we don't have one high maintenance machine that we use a little bit of the time. We'll have two less maintenance machines that we can use most of the year.

And I think these multi-tool concepts are, I mean, it's the way to go. You used to have to have a mower. You used to have a pulverizer. And every one of them had an engine and tires and all that other stuff. These multi-tools have really changed the landscape of construction in general, but road maintenance in particular. And I think the other great thing about it is that A skid steer can be used almost anywhere and can be. So it's a good multi-tool to have so you reduce your footprint really. It's a good plan. And in fact, our dump trucks are like that, right? We have a dump truck that sand truck slides into it. We've got a plow that we can put on it and we trade it. It's got a J-hook on it. We drop off the bed and put on a water truck.

Well, the city has those. I'm looking at those. Eventually, I would like to get to that point. Is that what the state runs then? The state has a couple, swap loaders or hook lift trucks. Yeah, those can be – yeah, they're very versatile.

Okay, thanks. I don't think I have a motion on this one yet.

I move to approve as presented.

Okay, and then – Do you have a preference? Because I think they're asking which format to use. I don't know if you have a preference. I do like the new format better, just because it helps tell the story. You know, it's not over. Let's go with that.

Oh, sorry.

This one. This is the update. Go to the front of it, Amanda.

Oh, the front.

So the other one's just detail. This one here kind of tells you the history and purpose of what's happened. I think it's a good tool going forward myself.

Yes.

Okay.

Okay, so. Yes, indeed. That's my motion.

That's your motion. I have a motion. I have a second motion. Any other discussion or comment? Any public comment on this item? Seeing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye.

Rex? Aye.

Aye. Thank you. Gotcha. And I vote aye also. Motion carries. Thank you. Thanks, Dennis. We're going on to E2, Pursuant to Notice 202631, Discussion and Consideration of Approval of the Public Safety. Sorry, I've got to turn the page here. Infrastructure Tax Plan for Fiscal Year 2027. This item is for possible action. I do know that Matt's not with us today, and I don't know if Amanda, if you're taking this, or if Pitts is here, and I don't see him.

I don't think Pitts is going to be here. Okay. We've got a little medical emergency going on, so I'm not sure he's had time to transition. So anyways, as far as the meat of the plan, most of that has stayed the same. There have been a couple of pieces here added to the fire district as far as just their equipment list here. At the very end, there were some trailers that were added. Sorry. Oh, here we go. So these trailers here were added to the plan just for reference. And then we have all of their facilities. I'm just going to scroll to the end of the plan because that's really kind of the summary of it. Sorry. Okay. OK, so first you'll see the fire district requests for fiscal year 27. There were some increases here. So on the replacement apparatus, there was an increase of $120,000 from last year's plan. on the major fleet repair and maintenance there was an increase from a hundred thousand to 250,000 and There was a decrease last year we had refurbishment of a particular piece of equipment of 160,000 and that's not on this plan that was completed and then There was an increase in this VFD station grant. So this is the money that we were using to, for example, do Osino and Deeth. And we had some money set aside for North Fork. So that request has been increased from $465,000 to $650,000 in the Fiscal Year 2007 plan. And this allocation request for Fire District Headquarters is new. And Matt's asking for $1 million for a total request of basically $2.9 million. Overall, that's an increase in requests for fiscal 27 of $1.295 million. Ambulance service, last year we asked for an ambulance. This year we did keep that in the plan, which was purchased. This would be an additional ambulance. Just due to the price increase in the apparatus, this is an increased request of $20,000. So last year it was $250,000. And then for the sheriff's office, this is pretty much the same as last year. So $400,000, you might recall last year, we... the lease program for the patrol vehicles from infrastructure that amount has stayed the same and then from time to time we do replace our admin vehicles also for detectives and things that are vehicles that we don't have quite as high mileage on that maybe don't make sense for the lease program so they're asking again to replace two vehicles and the outfit for those This is the same as last year. And then we did request the facility condition assessment that did not get done last year. So we're asking to carry that forward into fiscal for 60,000 and then We've been talking now for a couple of years about the behavioral health unit or the expansion to the jail. We have gone through the needs assessment and kind of the pre-planning process, and the price tag on that is anywhere between $16 and $18 million. Last year, we asked to obligate $500,000 towards that. This year, we're asking to obligate an additional $500,000. And clearly, we'll have to put together different sources of funding to pay for that project eventually. But this is a source that will help us get there, especially with design engineering and kind of some of that pre-work that needs to be done. So I do have a little bit of a comparative here for you. I apologize. This bottom one is actually fiscal year 26. So these were the consolidated requests for last year. Total approved for last year were 2.9. Total requests this year is 4.255.

I have some comments and some points that I'd like to make, but I'll give you guys a chance first if you want to.

Yeah, this is, is there some reason why this wasn't on the agenda? It is right there. This right here? No, that's just the notice.

I have it on mine. Let me go back out of it again.

That's weird. I haven't seen it.

Mr. Chairman, it was added late when I first looked at it.

It was added late. Under Sheriff Ames has been out of the office as well. This is one that we can probably table if you guys want to. Being that we've got Matt gone and we've got Under Sheriff Ames gone, it probably wouldn't hurt to to table this conversation if you'd like.

And I'm looking at Brian's live. For some reason, his hyperlink isn't there. But mine's here. Let me give it to you so you can see it.

Let me just borrow your iPad.

Yeah.

Let me get it.

You can drive.

Mine's bigger.

Here it is right here. Okay. Sorry.

Go ahead and drive. Well, if there's nobody that's specifically come for this item, I wouldn't mind taking her down the road for two weeks.

It'll probably be August 5th before we'd be able to bring that back just because of the public notice process. But honestly, with everything that we have going on, I don't know that Matt will be available before then anyway.

Well, I'm indifferent to that, but I do have a couple of comments that I'd like to make. First of all, we can't quite pull off the 4.255. We're about a million shy of that. So we're going to have to do some trimming. And as it relates to buildings, the commission has made it a priority, and we have a needs assessment to back this up, to do an addition at the jail and an addition here at the complex somewhere. We haven't gone through a needs assessment for a... He's calling about a fire district headquarters there. I don't know that we absolutely need that today, but even if we do, to me, I think there's higher priorities in there. For me, I want to make sure that all the VFWs have all the updated equipment and all the buildings done before we start doing that.

VFDs?

Volunteer Fire Performance.

Not Ws. Huh? Zed VFW. Oh, I'm sorry. Geez, I'm sorry.

I meant VFD. Thank you. Yeah, that's different. Thanks. It's good to have friends, right? So anyway, that's a point that I want to make. And honestly, it's essentially outside of a few increases that Amanda pointed out. It's essentially exactly what we looked at last time if we took out the headquarters. So, and again, this commission has not prioritized that. We have not considered that or prioritized that. And Amanda said earlier too, and it's right, whatever we use, it's going to have to be done from capital. This doesn't generate enough revenue to do a big capital project like that. Maybe engineering, like she said, that would be appropriate. We're going to need the capital fund to do those other two priorities. So, and again, until we get those other elements done within the volunteer fire department, there I go, just take the W right out of it, until we get that done, because we're functioning now, right? I don't know that we need to add another 10 or 15, I mean, it'd be nice, but that's where I'm at. Yes, make a motion to table.

Whatever your pleasure.

Second. Okay, any comments or actually have a motion and a second to table?

No, that's fine with me. When I first started looking at the agenda, it was not on there. So I really have not been able to look at it in detail. So that would please me to table it.

Okay, sounds good. We do have a motion and a second. Any other discussion or comment? Any public comment? Did you? Yeah, go ahead. Yeah, come on up.

Jesse Barr, Spring Creek Association. I wasn't able to review it ahead of time. I would have sent questions ahead of time, so I'm glad it wasn't me who was doing something wrong on my computer. My one question, when you mentioned the new headquarters, does that have something to do with the Spring Creek Ambulance? Is this the fund that you guys, is that a separate fund?

No, it's a different thing that he's asking for. He wants to build another facility here in Elko that co-locates Elko Ambulance Emergency Management and Fire Department.

Would the Spring Creek expansion be from this plan specifically?

It could be. So currently we are working on the remodel of the Spring Creek Fire Station. We just awarded the bid. We met with a contractor last week. We expect that construction remodel to start here soon. It's not really an expansion. So it's remodeling the volunteer side to be crew space for the ambulance service and probably some office space to go along with that kitchen space as well. So it's just remodeling where they're currently at.

That really doesn't need to be on this plan at all. That's already kind of taken care of, it sounds like. Yes. Okay, awesome, thank you.

Any other comments on this item before we vote? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

And I vote aye also. Motion carries, thanks. Rex?

I am.

Yes, sir, thank you. Item F, 2027 Nevada legislative session, bill draft request for public hearing. Pursuant to notice number 202630, conduct a public hearing to receive public input regarding a potential legislative proposal for the upcoming 84th Nevada legislature session, which convenes on February 1st, 2027. This item is for possible action. Amanda.

All right, so this is basically the same list as we have had for the last several meetings. There's some explanation here, but ultimately we need to boil it down to one of these BDR concepts to work on to submit to the legislature. There is a form that's attached to the agenda, which is what LCB will want from us. when we go through this process. So there's a couple of questions that we need to answer through that process, but more importantly today is to get feedback from our community about what's most important to them and to you all and to pick a concept so that we can move forward with that.

Mr. Chairman, if I could, this is Rex. Go ahead. I added the nuclear idea months ago or whatever. And let's remove that since it's way more complicated than we could ever accomplish today. And then also the one about the professional license or replica custody. I've talked to Bert Ger and he's happy to carry that one. So we could, we could scratch that from today's discussion also.

Okay. That was, Mr. Chairman, that was the only one that I'm really wanting was the reciprocity of licenses because it affects us so much in Jackpot and in West Wendover. But other than that, the one that really stands out for me is about the water treatment facilities, whereas that changed the requirements for full-time water operation on small That's the only other one that I really have feelings about.

That's the Jarvidge one?

Yes, correct. Yeah.

Yeah, I would also be in favor of that one. I do recommend the license reciprocity, and if Assemblyman Gurr is willing to carry that, that's great news. But as a number two, I think the water system has a real impact on jarbage, especially So that would be that would be nice to see that one Yeah, I mean really that's our only Water system that requires a treatment to certification.

It's a little more complicated as it's a surface water treatment plant The rest of ours are groundwater Systems and then I do I do think it's important, though, to consider the first one on here, which would allow our building department to review and approve residential septic systems and issue those permits here locally. That has been a function of our state environmental health services group under DBPH for years and years. Part of that is because they are a health jurisdiction, but or a public health jurisdiction. But I just, I feel like that will have a greater impact in our community because again, we're able to take care of our people here locally. We can go and do those. But that's just my two cents.

And I absolutely agree with Amanda. Let me tell you one thing really quickly is NACO, we get one bill, NACO gets five. NACO is, they're looking at paring that down soon. but one of the ones they're considering is the open space one, which is the one we have here. So I kind of have a good feeling they're going to take that, although I don't know for sure. And then the other thing is, like Amanda said, with the septic thing, there is an absolute disconnect between building department and that septic system. You wouldn't think there would be, but there is a disconnect. You can literally have a home get a certificate of occupancy and not have a certificate of occupancy on a septic tank. And it creates all, I see this as a customer service thing that we should be doing because we're out there anyway, inspecting the building. And, um, we have a little bit more latitude. There's a, there's another, there's another feature too. If you have a built on a basement and, and you don't finish that basement and you undersize that septic system, you don't get to add more bedrooms. And those are the kinds of customer service things that I think we can handle much better on a local level. I mean, here's the current requirement. We've got building officials that are reviewing plans that are submitted by architects and engineers. They're not architects and engineers. It's really no different than a septic system, but the law says they have to have a four-year degree to inspect a septic system, yet they're inspecting buildings. It's a bizarre thing. So I think, you know, I don't know if we could champion that fix. And then obviously I agree with, you know, getting some type of grace on the water plants because you don't have many people that have that type of certification. Do we want to have that type of certification? Sure we do. but sometimes you just need a little time to get there. And if you're relying on people that are working or living up there, there's just not that many people. So I think for me, those two are the highest priority, but we'll get one.

Mr. Chairman, one thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is the revision to NRS 338 on the million dollar public works project i thought i had that pretty high on my list yeah it's really high but i think we're gonna you know we've tried that so many times rex that i get thrown away a bill oh just wasting wasting our time okay i appreciate that that's my that's my opinion my friend i respect your opinion so thank you

I think just for some more context, too, on the septic system piece is that in the last legislative session, environmental health services was split. So environmental health services used to also include the restaurant inspections with a myriad of other types of facility inspections. And now that food inspections and the restaurant stuff has been moved over to Department of Ag, DBPH has kept the septic system stuff um one of the reasons for that four-year degree though was because of the food service side of things and so i think there is really um to have a conversation with the state and to perhaps have a legislative fix to allow for um the counties to be able to take that on

Well, I would defer to Amanda and consider the first one as a priority. I mean, the water system is also important, but Amanda is more familiar with the priorities, so I would say I would go with the first one as recommended.

Yeah, are we making a decision today?

Yes, we have to.

I guess I'd go with that then, too, because Jarvidge is just so small.

And I think you know in part so there's a lot of discretion from ndp side on the water treatment stuff And it's a matter of working with them. There's there are some requirements, but they're not hard and fast requirements for example you don't have to spend 24 months in the plant operating it you do have to have certain certifications of course, but it is they do vary they have been gracious to the county as far as the garbage system goes and So there could be some room for some change there. I don't think we're going to get enough grace to say you don't have to have a treatment too, but we can probably work with them a little bit to make ends meet on that one.

Okay. Well, yeah, then I would also approve the first one.

Is that a motion?

Sure.

How should we word that?

I move that the commission present item number one on our list of build that draft request ideas. Thanks.

I would second that. Got a motion and a second. Any other discussion? I think it is the biggest area of impact when you think about it. Outside of the cities and Montello, everybody in the whole county is on the septic system. Everyone. So it's a big number. Rex, any comments?

No, I agree.

Okay, any public comment on this one before we vote? Seeing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye. And I vote aye.

Aye.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Unanimous. The only thing that I'd want to make sure is that Burt Gurr actually does do the license reciprocity.

He has been involved in those conversations for a couple of years now. We locally have had those conversations. I know he's visited with Jackpot specifically about that. So I do know that it's been on his radar for quite some time, and I'm confident that he'll take that forward.

I'll make a note to contact him as soon as this meeting is over.

Thanks, Rex. Thank you. Move on to Item G, Reach Air Ambulance Service Franchise Agreement Renewal. Do you want discussion, consideration of approval of renewal of REACH Air Ambulance Service Franchise Agreement with Elko County, which expires on July 1st, 2026? I know we have representatives of REACH, but Amanda, are you taking this one? Sure.

So we have had a franchise agreement with reach air medical services for a long time now and about five years ago we were in the process of reviewing this agreement and At the time medics came and asked us not to renew that agreement in our mountain health has since purchased medics and Their business model is a little bit different and at the time you know we really felt strongly that it was important to have a two different air assets here in Elko County to serve our communities and since then I think That that part is kind of died down a little bit and we've continued to have the franchise agreement with reach I think it's been a great relationship. We trained together We obviously go on calls together. And so really there is not many changes In the agreement itself the effective data changed There is what we call a treat no transport rate of course we've updated the just The name for our dispatch center, which is now the regional communication center since the county has taken Sorry, I'm fighting with the mic today But that treat no transport rate was three hundred and forty dollars and that does increase based on Chris CPI Yeah, so that does increase each year based on CPI. So that's now been updated in the agreement to reflect that. So it's actually $440. And what treat no transport actually means is that, for example, we respond to... Let's just say there's a car accident on Mountain City Highway. We respond. REACH also responds. We may use some supplies to treat the patient, but REACH ultimately transports. And so we only get paid generally for loaded miles. So we only get paid when we transport a patient. So in this case where REACH transports the patient, we don't get paid. So that $440 is really meant to offset our supplies and a little bit of our cost in transportation. responding to that Call for service so that's what that is and other than that there's some contact information update and that's all we have We do have Riley little here from reach if you have questions or Riley if you'd like to say anything Good afternoon commissioners.

I'm Riley little for the record. Thank you for having me today I'm proud to be here representing reach and medical services We have been honored to be the provider of air medical services for Elko County over the last many years, and I'm here today in hopes of continuing this relationship. REACH has a rotor team, a fixed-wing team, as well as a membership program to support the Elko County residents. Membership covers the entire household for all out-of-the-pocket expenses, should they be transported by REACH, and costs only $99 a year. With the hospital having their own contractual provider, this agreement helps us to stay here as well and gives the community two options, ready to help when they have the need. I appreciate the commission taking this into consideration, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thanks, Riley. Questions or comments from the commission?

So who was the Air Med-X? Was that the other provider?

Med-X was the provider. Yeah, they were purchased by Intermountain Health, the hospital system. And so they do have the contract with the hospital to do transports for the hospital, so inter-facility transports. They do... It's mainly inter-facility transports. However, we have called on them at times when we may need more than one air asset or something along those lines. We have found that reach and medics, as we still call them medics, I still call them medics, work really well together. They work well with our ambulance team as well as all of our other public safety providers. Okay.

So the difference on this... What do we call this?

Franchise agreement.

Franchise agreement. There you go. Thanks. Your friend. Sure. When we make a call, when we call for air ambulance service, it's first to reach.

So for emergency transport, so you call 911 and you need an air asset, REACH is the first that gets called. They're dispatched. Yes, they are dispatched first. On the flip side of that, on the inter-facility side, Med-X is generally the one who is first called. They have basically a quarters, a headquarters, or a living facility, if you will, at the hospital. So it's kind of the best of both worlds, right? You've got medics who's doing the inter-facility transports, and then you have who's doing the emergency incident or emergency services transport. Yeah.

And if, I mean, if no one's, and this is how we have been doing it for how long? A couple of years?

Long time, yeah.

And this contract is just for two more years.

So it's a two-year contract, and then we can renew for an additional three years to make it a total of a five-year contract.

In the past, it was longer, but... And there's no... Nobody's opposed to this? Well, I move to approve this Air Ambulance Services Agreement as presented.

Okay, I have a motion. I'll second. I'm going to second. Any other discussion?

I'll just state I'm in favor because the franchise, I think, promotes us having two carriers in Elko County. Because if we were down to one carrier, we'd have less service. But by having the franchise, it ensures that REACH stays in the area. And then Intermountain operating out of the hospital, of course, they're assured a lot of business through the hospital. So I think this promotes two carriers for Elko County, which is better for the public. Thank you.

Great point. Thank you. Okay, any public comment on this? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye.

Aye for me.

Great. Thanks, Rex. Motion passes. H, Elko County Integrated Source Water Protection Plan, H1, presentation by Resource Concepts, Inc., regarding the Nevada Integrated Source Water Protection Program and discussion, consideration possible direction to staff to engage with Resource Concept Incorporated, to create a countywide source water protection plan. Source water protection plans are a voluntary, non-regulatory tool that allow local governments to take a look, take a proactive look at possible sources of drinking water contamination and plan for steps to avoid or mitigate those sources. No local funds are required for participation beyond staff time. Hi there, how are you? Welcome. I'm good, how are you? Great, thanks. State your name, please, for the record.

Allison Kramer. with resource concepts.

Great.

A little arrow.

Yeah, I see like a little pin.

Oh, there we go. OK. You can go back to the first one really quick.

Yeah, OK. Well, thanks for having me.

So we're going to kind of talk about Nevada's Integrated Source Water Protection Program today, and that's a voluntary, non-regulatory program funded by the Bureau of Safe Drinking Water. Ethan Mason is our program coordinator at NDEP. Ethan's in the military, so he's in training, but RCI, we've been the technical assistance providers for this contract for the last 12 years. Okay, next slide. So what is source water protection? So it's really kind of part of the Safe Drinking Water Act's multibarrier approach to protect drinking water sources. And kind of assessing and protecting our public drinking water sources, that's really kind of the first line of defense under that multibarrier approach, right? And so in Nevada... The Integrated Source Water Protection Program, which I'm gonna call ISWP from here on out, is a voluntary non-regulatory program to kind of work with counties and communities on developing and implementing plans to protect public drinking water sources. Okay, next slide. So when we say source water, what do we really mean? And that's really that kind of raw, untreated water supply that's gonna be used as drinking water sources and who supplies our public drinking water sources, our public water systems. And so, next slide. We have three kinds of public water systems. We have community public water systems. So these are the water systems that are really serving our primary sources of drinking water. They're serving at least 25 people year round, right? They're serving the community as a primary source. Then we have non-transient, non-community water systems. So these are kind of the water systems like, say, maybe a school, right? They're serving our community for about six months out of the year, but it's not the teacher or the student's primary source of drinking water, right? So it's kind of a non-community system. And then we have our transient systems, and these are like our bars, restaurants, maybe a rest stop, campground, right? You're going in. to your favorite restaurant, you're grabbing a glass of water for dinner once a week. Okay, and so let's talk about Elko County. So countywide, you have about 111 active public water system wells in your county serving residents. You have eight active springs that serve residents. Next slide. Altogether, you've got about... Ooh, she went. Sorry. No, you're okay. Altogether, you've got about 44 countywide active public water systems. Four of them right for your cities. They all have wellhead or source water protection plans from the early 2000s. City of Elkos was last updated in 2013. And then next. Then you've got... Three other kind of public water systems, Jackpot, Spring Creek, Lamoille, they also have wellhead protection plans. And then next slide. Then you have about 27 other public water systems that are not covered under this voluntary non-regulatory program. And then you got about 10 federal facilities. So then let's kind of talk about what this program is. It's really about sources of drinking water for public water systems and communities. It's about kind of protecting and preserving that water quality. We want to prevent groundwater contamination before it occurs. Do that countywide and community by community. This program provides local plan development and updates as well as implementation. that can also address emerging contaminants, like what's coming down the pipeline as far as water quality protection goes. And it's technical assistance and funding for all of the above. Next slide. There's a couple of things that this program is not. It's not about private wells, and it's not about water rights. We are talking about water quality. We're not talking about water quantity. Because we're a voluntary, non-regulatory program, We can't provide funding for regulatory issues, right? So if you have pre-existing contamination issues like things like arsenic or nitrate, those are regulatory issues, and so we can't provide funding to kind of assist with those. We also don't really work with wastewater, or we don't provide technical assistance for any of that, okay? Okay, so next slide. What are the pitfalls and what are the costs? So we've been doing this program for about 12 years. And I have a map on the next slide that'll show you. We work all across the state. We haven't really found any pitfalls. So if you decide you would like to participate in this program and you do find some, let us know. Hopefully we can fix them. The cost is really limited staff time. We kind of do all the technical analyses, all the mapping, all the documentation, all the updating. But we do need your staff to tell us what an Elko countywide plan looks like. I'm in Carson City. I can't write your plan for your county. So your team is to kind of set those priorities and let us know what this plan looks like for you so that it fits your county. OK, next slide. So participation to date. We pretty much got this map full. Everything in dark blue, those are going to be all the counties that have a countywide plan that has been adopted by either the community, the city, or the county. It's also been endorsed by the state of Nevada. And everything in light blue, those are the ones that are in progress. And I put Elko County in light blue because a lot of your city's are kind of in progress of updating those wellhead protection plans.

And next slide.

So what does this really look like? What does a countywide approach look like, right? Developing a local planning team, that's really important. And we kind of had some conversations earlier today about what that might look like for Elko County. But it really needs to be kind of your local planning team, your stakeholders, your community, because they know what you all want in this plan and how it works in Elko County. How can we work together to protect water quality? So next slide. Then we kind of do this drinking water source inventory and analysis, right? So you know what you have, you know who's providing public water supply and where it is. You have both groundwater and surface water sources. Next slide. We look at potential risk to water quality, right? Like what could be a potential risk to water quality and how as a community and a county do we want to work with that, right? You don't want to discourage economic development. You want to bring economic development in, but you want to partner with your economic developers to say, okay, water quality is a priority for us, so how are we going to do this together, right? We're going to build, we're going to grow, but we're going to protect our drinking water quality. Next slide. We also look at kind of source water protection areas. So these are really, again, non-regulatory, voluntary boundaries where you've decided you want to kind of prioritize water quality protection, right? And so at the top, we do kind of really simple groundwater models, hydrogeological analyses for each community and each water source where you can really understand which way is that groundwater flowing. So at the top, you have the picture of jackpot. And those are called capture zones. And that little arrow is showing you which direction the groundwater is flowing. So you can really look at it and understand, okay, we're going to build this community. We're going to grow. What areas do we want to manage so that we know we're pulling the groundwater up from the southeast to the northwest? And so maybe we want to kind of prioritize different activities going on. And then you can look at Montello. You have spring sources there. We can look at the hydrology there of your entire watershed. So you can really just look at and prioritize where's the water coming from, where's it going, and which areas do we really want to focus on protecting. Then we look at developing community strategies and actions for actually implementing your plan. And again, this is non-regulatory. It's totally voluntary. but it's provided at no cost from the state. And so no one's going to come back at you and look at your action plan and go, you didn't do this or you didn't do that. The beauty of the action plan is that you can call me and go, hey, we're ready to implement this action, and we'd like some technical assistance to do that. And then I will say, great, it's in your action plan. Let's go. OK, next slide. So some of the things that we've done in other counties and communities kind of what these plans can look like on the ground. So in Nye County, it's really rural. Nye County actually has over 100 water systems, so more than Elko. But a lot of times, some of the folks in the rural communities have a hard time disposing of their pharmaceuticals. So we work with the water district. to distribute these pharmaceutical deactivation bags, right? So there's a little carbon filter in this bag. You just add water. Then you add your pharmaceuticals. You can shake it. It renders those pharmaceuticals inert, and you can dispose of them in the trash. Why is this source water protection? Because pharmaceuticals are considered an emerging contaminant. So if you flush them down the toilet, where are they going? Into your aquifer, right? So we're kind of protecting the source from pharmaceuticals. We've worked with a lot of communities, small communities on wellhead protection, doing cameras and signage to kind of prevent vandalism. Because it can happen sometimes in rural communities. If you need cameras, if you need signage to kind of monitor what's going on at your drinking water sources, we've provided those resources. We worked with one community farther in Western Nevada that has PFAS contamination in their drinking water. And so how do you communicate with your community when that happens? And how do you communicate about what the water system the water safe for public health? And so we worked with them for over the last year and a half on how to communicate with their community. We also do a lot of education and outreach. So that's kind of Aaron there in Carson City. Carson City has a spring source that's right in town. It's also a hiking trail, but you're not allowed to bring your dog. You're not allowed to swim, right? And a lot of times the community doesn't understand that. And so we hold a big event every year. People love it. And we really can kind of talk to them about why they can't swim in this source because it's a drinking water source and where it comes from, right? So that's kind of a big part of what we do. And then... A lot of times when we're out here surrounded by BLM land, that's most of Nevada. So when there's kind of a federal project coming up, we can kind of work on reviewing the NEPA document that most facilities have to do when they're opening something up on federal land and kind of discuss about what are the questions you have about water quality protection for this project and what would Okay, so next slide. Okay, so I do an Elko countywide source water protection plan. So one of the reasons, I think the biggest one, but provided in your packet, you know, we've kind of been working with some of the communities that have wellhead protection plans on updates in the cities, and six of them have provided you with letters that say they support the countywide source water protection plans. You know, being a public water system operator, running a public water system can sometimes be a thankless job, but it's a really important job, right, for public health and for providing us with drinking water. So this is really a way that we can say we hear you, we support you, and we're going to work on a plan that supports how you are protecting drinking water supplies. You also have this really great water resources management plan. That's water resources. You have a really great public land and natural resources plan. That's public land. Why not have a water quality protection plan? And we can build this plan however you want it to be built, however your team wants it to look. And we can make sure it fits within the planning framework that you already have so it's not just another piece of paper on the shelf. Okay, next slide. Was that 11 minutes? How many minutes was that? So what are we really looking for you? What do we need from you? Really a letter of support to participate. Again, it's a voluntary non-regulatory program. I've kind of provided a draft letter in your packet for your consideration. Really kind of giving staff permission to join this planning team. So it really looks like an Elko County-wide plan. I can't write an Elko County-wide plan. I'm in Carson City. So we need your team to kind of help guide us on how you want this to look. And then at the end, we will bring it back for your review, comment, hopefully ultimately adoption. And then NDP will endorse the plan, and then we can work on implementing your plan. Leverage kind of the funding that is available for this from this program That's it.

Thanks Allison.

Yeah, you have any questions or comments or thoughts Well we haven't We haven't had issues with water quality yet. Have we I? think now is the perfect time to make sure that we don't because we all like nice clean drinking water and And in as much as these plans are voluntary, non-regulatory, and come at no monetary expense to us, I think it'd be a fine idea to direct staff to work with RCI to develop such a plan.

Does Curtis Moore think about this?

I agree with Brian. I think this is a good chance to be proactive and to kind of war game out some of these scenarios where we have a problem before we actually have to deal with it. So yeah, I'm a big fan of the idea. Rex, thoughts?

Well, I guess I gotta be the contrarian, Mr. Chairman. Again, I think we don't have any problems, but we've got the RCI coming and telling us we need to fix a problem that doesn't exist. And it sounds to me like RCI got some sort of a grant and they're trying to spend the money. And I just don't understand that. I mean, it's voluntary, non-regulatory. But then she says it's not going to be just another piece of paper on the shelf. I think that's exactly what it's going to be. It seems like a top-down approach instead of what it should be. It should be a bottom-up. And I guess one question I'd have to ask is we've got six communities that are encouraging us to do this. Can they do it on their own without the county signing up for this? Is she still at the lectern there?

Yeah, I'm here. Yeah, these are great questions. And so just to give you a little background, so every state can have a source water protection program and most of them do. So in Nevada, it's, It's under the Bureau of Safe Drinking Water. And so some states have a regulatory program. Nevada's just decided we don't want any more regulations, so we just have a voluntary program. So that's kind of why they live, you know, with the community or the county. And to answer your question about the cities updating their wellhead protection plans, you know, without the countywide participation, yeah, we can certainly do that. We've kind of been in the process of doing that already but you know they've showed an interest in having kind of a county-wide plan and so that's kind of why we're here today to see if you like to participate in that okay well that does answer my question and you know that that is the natural inclination of people i mean you come to them and

and present something so automatic as, do you want clean drinking water? And of course, everybody says yes. But I just don't see the point of pursuing this when it's voluntary, non-regulatory. What are we accomplishing? And we are, like you said, it's no cost to the county, but you are asking us to commit our staff time. And... I don't really know how much time that is, but I think our staff is already pretty well consumed. I don't know how much time they want to commit to a voluntary non-regulatory system. I just don't see the sense of it.

So Rex, from our end, I think the value of Some of this is the future technical assistance that we can access so if we decide in this plan One of the things we've talked about for a few years is putting up a fence around the Tuscarora water tanks and Sort of increasing the security in that area and so and if we put that in an action plan and Now, maybe five or 10 years down the road when we decide to or have the funding to do that, RCI will be able to sort of help us with the technical assistance of making sure that we're compliant with any state or federal regulations with the application, those sorts of things. And so that's where I think the value of this plan is. is in that technical assistance.

To build a fence.

Are you done, Rex? Go ahead, sorry.

Just one more question, Mr. Chairman. I'm sorry I can't remember the guy's name, but how much time would you expect from our county staff?

Yeah, it's a good question, and thanks for the opportunity to answer. So we try to take as much of the burden off of your staff as we can. We'll coordinate all the meetings. We'll reach out to everyone. We'll write all the documentation. We'll do all the mapping. Basically, we'll do everything. It looks like about two hours maybe every three months until we're kind of finished. We try to really take that burden off of you guys and staff. You know, really, it's kind of catered to where, you know, drinking water source inventory, kind of the review of what do you think water quality risks are, action plan development, and we kind of go through each meeting with, I do all the agendas, the meeting minutes. I mean, we pretty much do everything and really try to take that burden off.

I'm here in two or three hours. is all you're expecting.

So I... Like every three months for maybe at least, you know, probably the next nine months, Elko's pretty big to kind of, by the time we end up getting back here.

Well, I think most of that's going to fall on Curtis and he's speaking in support of it. Got another job, Curtis. But I guess I can... I can go along with this. It's voluntary, non-regulatory, and if it becomes a burden to our staff, we can say, well, we quit.

I did have just a couple of quick questions. Just a point of clarification, Rex. I know that there are wellhead protection plans out there. In fact, I'm looking on their presentation. And Elko, Carlin, Wells, Westland all have well protection head plans. Jackpot, Spring Creek, Elko County School District, and Spring Creek and Lamoille all have well head protection plans. That's probably well over 90% of our population that's on a community system that has that. But, you know, I mean, it gets down to the line of coming up with, making sure that we know what, and with that, we've done massive improvements to Montello, Jarbage, and Tuscarora water systems over the years historically. But it's like, is there any, the benefit that I see, is there any low-hanging fruit that we can try to get just to make sure that the water sources don't get contaminated because we might not be thinking about Something like a fence. I mean, most of our places, the camera idea, we don't have internet service there. So I don't know if it requires internet. That's not even going to be an option for us. But, you know, I mean, I... But the one thing on here that you do have that I think is interesting is you have, there's 27 public water systems, which I named some of them, Montello, Mountain City, Tuscarora, Jarbage Schools. But then it has bars, restaurants, RV parks, lodges, et cetera. And that's the one, that's a category where I'm trying to rack my brain, trying to think. I could see an RV park, right? Maybe over 25 connections to an RV park. But I cannot envision a bar that's somewhere out there that's on a, its own water system, you know, I'm not, I'm having a hard or a lodge. And wouldn't that still need to meet that community qualification of that you have here at the, the 25, these, uh, one of these, uh, categories here.

Those are considered like the transient systems that are kind of out in your County that are just kind of spread out throughout the County.

And if I could name them all right now.

No, that's okay. I'm having a hard time. Maybe it's Shantytown. I don't know.

I bet the Jiggs bar is on its own well.

Yeah, it is. Yeah, I think you're right for sure. These are just, you know, we can kind of work with all. It doesn't have to be a community water system to be covered under this source water protection.

Well, I guess the point I'm trying to make is, is we shouldn't let the six letters influence our decision because they already have plans. They already have a plan, right? I mean, that's all I'm trying to say. And I wanted to make sure that Rex understood that we're not preventing them from having a plan because they already have a plan. But my point is, I do think it's a good idea, but I do have a technical question. And that is in the capture areas. Right. So and I'm familiar with the city of Elko capture areas. You know, when you have development or rangeland or you have maybe grazing and some of those other areas, that catchment area map that you showed of jackpots. giant right so you know what type of I'm trying to understand what unanticipated impacts that well zone or that capture area could have i.e. I'm grazing my cattle over here you know what I'm getting at or I'm putting a fertilizer out right because I'm growing crops or whatever it is so that's the piece that I see that potentially could be an issue in the more rural area of the county because again 90 probably at least 90 percent of our population is covered under a wellhead protection that's i'm not saying i don't care about the other 10 percent that aren't i'm just saying that those many of those systems have already had an upgrade and i'm just trying to understand if we go plopping these down in elko county are we going to have any un Intended consequences. That's what I'm trying to understand from a technical point of view.

Yeah, and so that's kind of it's a good question and it gets asked a lot and that's kind of why we Hone in on the point like it's kind of a non regulatory Program, right so it doesn't have teeth unless you give it teeth Right and so it's used as a planning tool for you right more information like hey, we're growing we're building and here's where our drinking water is coming from. And so how do we want to protect that together as a community? It's a tool for you to use. And say, OK, we know the groundwater flow direction is going from the southeast to the northwest. We know this is our drinking water well location right here. Do we want to put an underground storage tank right next to our drinking water well? Maybe not. Maybe we want to move it down the street. Or maybe there's a different parcel of land that they can use, right, that's going to be the same price or whatever. And so it's to use as a tool and for you to have the conversation.

And, you know, to come up with best practices.

Best practices.

And so the thing is I want to just make sure, you know, sometimes you find something out and then I would want to make sure that NDEP doesn't come back and, They don't have any authority to enforce it.

This is an Elko County-wide plan.

Okay, and then I'm sure you're aware of this. I know there's some quasi-municipal well systems for small subdivisions. Do those qualify?

It depends if they're registered as a public water system under the safe drinking water.

Okay.

Under Bureau of Sanctuary and Water. We can look into that.

What I think is, what I recall the cutoff is four. Four connections or more is a community system. Anything under that is not. So there are some of those that are out there. So, I mean, this could be a pretty big problem. And maybe you've already got it accounted for. I don't know. There's just the questions I have. I mean, I think for the best practices, I think that makes sense. But again, we're going to do, I guess Elko County is going to do the best practices as it relates to everything outside of the incorporated cities. And the cities and the Great Basin Water Authority are going to implement their own best practices.

I've got a question for Rex. Rex, do you anticipate the state, at some point in the future, the state says, okay, every county has one of these non-mandatory plans, so they're doing it anyway, so let's just make it mandatory. Now they have to do it.

Absolutely. I worry about that. And like the RCI representative just said, like somebody wants to put in a storage tank where they don't think it should belong, then they're going to make them move it. Well, that's not voluntary and non-regulatory. That's a state demand.

Well, I understood it would be us deciding if someone petitions that they want to put a tank here and come to us, and then we look at the plan and say, well, that doesn't really fit very well. Can't we do that today? Yeah, but I don't have any reference. I don't know where there's 100 and how many wells are there, 111 wells that we have. that we're using for public water.

So you think if we don't agree to this that RCI won't give us that information?

I don't know. Curtis, is it difficult for you to find that information?

It kind of depends on who's got it and who's keeping track of it. So if it's in one spot, then it's really easy for me to find. If it's not, then I have to go out and wrangle it from various sources. And if I get hit by a bus here in a few days, then the next person has to re-find that information rather than just having it all gathered.

One would hope it's with the Nevada Division of Water Resources, but who knows, right? That's what you're saying.

Mr. Chairman, if I can again, I think mine concerns Kim Ling a lot more concern on the commission there, and maybe it's not necessary. I mean, if this truly is voluntary, non-regulatory, like I said earlier, if this becomes a burden on our staff, can we... Can the RCI representative answer that question?

Yes, you can definitely quit.

I guess the board giveth and taketh away.

They're not going to make you do anything that you don't want to do.

I'm just voicing my reservation. Just some red flags coming up in my mind. I want them to voice them, but I can tell that... the sentiment of the board is in favor of this. So I don't, don't let me stop you.

Well, I think it's good to have a robust discussion Rex. And you know, like I said, I think it's in the best practice, but we also need to be careful because I'm going to use this as an example, but you have one water authority that, you know, if they, say that, you know, this is part of our plan. Next thing you know, they're going to the PCUN and raising rates and using this plan to justify those rates. I think all of those things we need to be cognizant of, right? I mean, we need to understand that.

Right. Just keep our eyes open.

Okay. Yeah, my feeling is that... this plan would inventory more resources. I mean, as Delmo said, 90% of the public water sources are already protected under wellhead protection plans. This would cover 27 additional water systems, Montello, Mountain City, Tuscarora, Jarvis, and many other rural places. So it would kind of inventory these areas. So it may provide more. of a central location for this to be mapped. And like Curtis said, all in one place. So I could see some value there. And it certainly isn't a necessity, but it is being offered to us. So I don't have any objection to it at this time. Okay.

Care to make a motion or comments or whatever you want to do.

I move that the Elko County Board of Commissioners accept the help of RCI in developing a, what did you call it, a SWPIT?

Community Source Water Protection Plan.

Community Source Water Protection Plan and direct and Elko Countywide and direct staff to assist where RCI needs it.

Okay, I have a motion. I'll second. I'll second. Any other discussion? Please don't take any of this personal, right?

We're just talking. These are great questions. Please don't take any of it personal. I appreciate it.

We're just trying to make good decisions.

We just like our liberty.

Absolutely, I do too.

All right, as this is an action item, is there any public comment on this item? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. I vote aye also.

I vote aye also.

Thank you. Thanks. Thanks for coming. Appreciate you being here. Let's see. I won Nevada Energy Public Safety Outage Management Event discussion regarding the June 27th, 28th, 2026 Nevada Energy Public Safety Outage management or otherwise known as PSOM event and the impacts of the Elko County residents, businesses, critical infrastructure and emergency services. So possible direction to staff regarding communications with NV Energy and other appropriate entities concerning the board's concerns and recommendation for future PSOM events. I don't believe we have anybody here from NV Energy, but Amanda, if you want to kick us off, that'd be great.

Sure. Actually, I'll have Lee probably kick us off as he was mostly managing this along with Chris, but this obviously had to be posted on the agenda before the weekend came around, so it did not end up happening, but go for it, Lee.

All right. Good afternoon. Lee Cavanaugh, Selco County Emergency Manager. So I think I'll start with during the projected PSOM, which did not end up actually occurring Elka County emergency management and NB energy has their own emergency management Kind of portfolio of people as well We did have some really open communication collaboration information sharing All that kind of stuff so that was good, but I would say that we are kind of in the consequence management phase of that and so those decisions for PSOM event are not made by the emergency management folks and They're not requested by emergency management here or a fire service here. They're a corporate directive essentially. So we're all kind of scuttling to manage the consequences as they come up. So I think starting with that, do you want me to review any of my staff report? Sure. Okay. What I would like to see in future Is that envy energy can isolate an NRH and our other health care facilities from? active measure and so that they can keep the health care facilities the Highland Manor Hospital energized if not that they need to be prioritized for prompt re-energization I think they worked with as well on what they call their community resource centers and But that was a little bit behind the power curve on timing. It's just one of the other points I would make is I think there was community and customer facing information that went out prior to information that came to emergency management, county management, fire service. So that's a concern. Worked with Jesse and Spring Creek Association to be sure that there was a community resource center that was going to be assigned to Spring Creek and one that would be on the east end of Elko, which is where they were projecting the outages at, but I would just like to see a little bit better coordination on that. And I'd like for the county to have early access to customer and community-facing information, even if that's just in advance of it going out, but I don't really love learning about things on Facebook, but Kind of as it progressed, we got more and more information. But the initial information and then when it was canceled, we got actual social media alerts on that before we got direct communication. They do work, NV Energy does work on cellular pre-positioning. So if the power goes out, some of the towers have battery backup, some of the towers have generators and things like that. They do work with that. We also worked with our collaborators with AT&T's FirstNet. To be sure that we were going to be covered, but I'd like to see kind of some more Information on that being shared earlier and wider so that we know what providers what locations what timing that kind of stuff I'd like to see a more granular map of the data set that shows the exact areas number of customers That can be provided for our pre-planning and And then they have a program called Green Cross. From the emergency management perspective, we do a lot of education with the public, fires out, fire district is out, city fire department, emergency management, always doing some kind of public information. And we would just like to maybe get some information on Green Cross so that we could share that. That is so that a customer may self-identify to and... that they have a power need for, say, an oxygen device or CPAP or a hospital bed or whatever, they get to self-identify to NV Energy. We don't get access to that information. So I would like at least to get de-identified information off of that. And then I think back to kind of the impacts is more clarity on the weather forecast. what their decision-making matrix is, to be sure that it coincides with what the National Weather Service or NOAA is saying about things and de-conflict any discrepancies. And then one of Amanda nice discussions was as it proceeds towards We want information on a scheduled kind of situation report So as we're proceeding towards we would like kind of holistic information as it goes towards and then if there is any power outage That we would want it more often than that and then on the recovery side once they recover the power We'd like additional information there, so that's just kind of staff report requests

Okay. Thoughts from the commission? Any comments?

I think Lee's done a dandy job of identifying all that I could think of for issues that we'd like a little more information on and so forth. Travis?

I agree. Thank you, Lee, for all your efforts and to make this more tailored to the need or to the risk and also the community need. Because, yeah, I agree. I think those outages are too broad and they could be better managed. Rex?

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, that's all... I know he's doing the best he can in that, but I just think it's a little bit inadequate. I think it's absolutely disgusting and immoral for the company to shut off someone's power over a perceived threat. And that's what they were planning this last weekend. Two days in advance of the event, they're planning to shut off the power. And in addition to the many medical requirements of electricity, that electricity provides a critical vital need for those served by water wells, which is a big part of our county. These outages are depriving those residents of their last line of defense for their lives and their property. They shut their well off. I mean, that's just disgraceful, I think. And I understand, you know, NV Energy is trying to protect itself from liability. You know, that's very understandable. I think there's got to be a better way. And I wonder, like, as Elko County, if we could somehow, via resolution or the like, grant them some sort of immunity from acts of God like wind and fire. Something that they could go and present to court to show that the County Commission itself has asked them not to shut the power off to our residents in these situations. And I know that's a discussion for another day but, Let's think about that and get our district attorney's opinion if that's worth the paper it's written on. But I know that's what they're angling for is they want to get enough people upset that they force our legislature to grant them that immunity. But is there something we can do in the meantime? I would sure be interested in pursuing that line of thought.

And I had a few thoughts too that I wanted to add. So what I recall, Rex, was last year when we had a conversation with them, they had informed us that this was the legislature that required them to have a plan. It doesn't, didn't specify what the, but the plan, it's very specific. It says that you have to have a de-energization plan, but they could set up the matrix like Lee referenced it. So And the other thing I recall them saying was that they said that we could say, hey, we want you to turn it back on. But as I recall, that shifted the liability to us. But here's the fundamental issues that I think is wrong in addition to what Lee said. What are we doing out there talking to the people about this? Why do we have everybody on staff putting out this fire? I'm going to call it a fire. It's not a fire. Why are they? They should be here. They should be the one managing it, not us. They should have a hotline that people could call, not us. So fundamentally, There's an issue with that procedure that needs to be addressed. They need to be here. Secondly, they talk about this impact would have been 8,000 people. That has to be half of their service customers. It has to be about half. I mean, in my mind, that's like having a water break somewhere and saying, you shut off the whole water system, fix the water break. No, you isolate the water, you isolate the break, fix the break, turn the water system back on. So if there's a material weakness in their infrastructure that doesn't allow them to have such a widespread outage, that's what we need to be discussing. How do we get that outage down to a manageable situation? And I'm like you. I know they have this one transport, this big substation over here on Last Chance. That's probably the, you know, maybe part of it could go underground or You know, there's there's it just feels like it feels like to me, like someone pulls a pin on a grenade, throws it into the room and they want to see what happens. That's that's how it feels like to me. and I think they're trying to do the best that they can, but I think it falls way short on just some fundamental issues, and I think we should direct staff or whoever to reach out to them and just say, hey, we have more expectation. I mean, Lee talks about coordination for us to have this information. That's great, but where are they? How come they're not here? Is that our responsibility? Those are my questions, so Their emergency becomes our emergency and I don't think that that should be from a fundamental. It's not our outage.

No 100% I would agree that it is not our outage the consequences become mine to manage. Like whether they turn it off or whether it gets burned up whatever right like the county. The emergency manager has to manage some of those consequences. I will say that their community resource center, that CRC that I spoke to, they do intend to have people at those, but that is once the outage starts, as far as I understand. It may be prior, like they may emplace them prior to, but that they will have folks on site at those, but not in advance that I've heard of. So I will make that note as well.

So this is possible action, gentlemen. And I do think that we should, whatever. I mean, I'm disappointed with the response. I mean, and I think that Lee's got some, I think we all have some great points. And I think that we should draft some type of a letter and see if we can't get that needle moved a little bit.

Commissioner, or Andrea, so we do have Paulina here from NV Energy. Paulina, did you want to say anything to the commission today?

Hi, good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Paulina Talpani. I'm the government relations advisor here in Southern Nevada. I'm actually covering for our Northern Nevada government relations manager, but I'm just here to monitor everyone's comments and we definitely do want to reach out perhaps to Lee just to strategize on outreach. We do understand the concerns on our end and unfortunately we weren't aware that this was going to be on the agenda today. So more than happy to, I can drop my email into the chat here and I'm happy to meet and kind of

figure out where we can go moving forward with um with peace on well i appreciate that paul uh paulina uh thank you for that i i think that that's a good first step you know our phones around here light up when this happens and so i i think i think we need to take a step back and we're right in the middle of fire season unfortunately but We need to take a step back and we need to look at this and say, you know, we all work for the same customers. We all work for the same customers. And I think we just need to have better collaboration and better, you know, better way of doing this. Because I think to Lee's point. We find out through social media. I mean that I I'm dumbfounded by that, but I just think there's a lot of opportunity for improvement and I hope that we can count on you to do that.

Yeah, no, absolutely. I know it's definitely not a one size fits all approach with, you know, collaboration and strategizing here in Southern Nevada. We deal with Mount Charleston and we kind of have a pretty good you know, kind of strategy going on here but you know what works here definitely doesn't work you know elsewhere so I'm very open to hear how we can move forward and I will be more than happy to drop my email and my contact info here and looking forward to um to meeting you know that's great and I appreciate the offer again for me I would be interested in knowing I mean it's a guess for me but I'm guessing 8,000 customers is half of your portfolio in Elko County

You know, so you have Mount Charleston, you know, I mean, but that that would probably be a fraction of Clark. I mean, an insignificant fraction. So, you know, I'm just trying to keep it. keep it you know at our perspective because when you wipe out half of the and then you're these critical pieces that Lee's talking about these guys are on that same part of that substation the hospital the hospital our treatment plant our traffic signals our airport it is a huge outage

And not just that, but also the city of Elko, you know, one of their large wells, I believe, for the water system. Yeah, large wells, yeah. Yeah, there's a lot of issues. I just think this is an interesting point, but Wells Rural Electric serves, by geography, a larger portion of Elko County than NV Energy does. And so I realize that different types of organizations here, but, you know, just looking at geography, why is it so different for REC than it is for NV Energy? I'd be great to understand that.

Yeah, great point. And, you know, like I said earlier, all that stuff's important, like the water treatment and the hospital and all that, but I keep thinking about the poor guy that's out there in Rendon or Elbers or somewhere like that trying to protect his home. He needs his well working.

Travis? Yeah, no, absolutely. And I... you know, completely understand the sentiments here. And, well, definitely, I've been taking notes of everyone's concerns and feedback. And, you know, once we do decide to, once we get that meeting locked in, we'll have our PSOM team, you know, our incident management team on there just to ensure that we have all the experts at hand to answer any questions.

Yeah, my comments, just some practical suggestions is NV Energy has a public utility, so it serves the public, same as Elko County. And so some protocols may be to increase the risk level that there's not an advertised or planned outage unless the risk is significant or high. Maybe raise that threshold. and also tailor it to which areas are prone to risk or that are high risk. So rather than shut off the whole substation, maybe some additional switches can be placed in. Also, the amount of time that it's shut off could be reduced. Of course, I imagine when you do give an announcement that it's going to be off for 12 hours or something, That's just an advisory that it could be for that long, but if it's only going to be for two hours, it may be a shorter period. But the second suggestion I have, other than raising the threshold for the risk, would be that before any announcement is made that The NV Energy coordinate with Elko County through Lee Cabaniss to consult with him. And that way the county is aware of it through our emergency planning before it hits social media. And there could be some collaboration there before an announcement is made. And also it could be tailored to the specific areas that may be at risk because Lee could also, in conjunction with our fire department, increase fire personnel in order to avoid a shutoff. We could also tailor it to areas that are at risk. And so you're not shutting off half the town. You're just shutting off. maybe a few rural subdivisions if necessary. Plus, we have fire breaks and fire mitigation going on, so it may not be necessary to shut them off at all. we could just increase our fire personnel at those critical times. Those are just a few proactive suggestions because I agree with Rex and everyone else that shutting off somebody's power supply for medical and especially for these rural wells, that may be their only way of fighting a fire if it were to happen.

Okay, thanks. So thanks for being here, Paulina. I appreciate you being the messenger. I look forward to the opportunity to have a further discussion in the spirit of improvement for our county.

Absolutely. Thank you so much.

Mr. Chairman?

Yes.

Yes. Are you going to take public comment on this?

Well, let me see if there's any action that we want to take here for just a second, but I will circle back to you just a second. Is there any action?

I would think, Mr. Chairman, as far as any action, Everything that's been suggested so far, I think, is long-term. You know, like more circuits so they're not cutting off so much, such a large area. You know, go underground. All that stuff's long-term. That's not going to happen this fire season. So I would suggest further action. Let's just keep this on the agenda and keep pursuing all the stuff that we've talked about and see where we can get some... some good ideas.

My suggestion would be to direct lead cabinets to consult with NV Energy and come back with suggestions for a future resolution or future action.

That works.

Was that a suggestion or a motion? I will make that a motion to direct staff, leave cabinets to consult with NV Energy for recommended resolutions or action to the Commission. Second.

And if I could ask you to amend your motion, Travis, to include not just consultation with NV Energy, but others, consult with everyone. Not just, you know, I'd like some consultation with our district attorney's office for my suggestion.

Rex, I think it's also important to include Spring Creek Association since they're a large piece.

Yeah, absolutely. Good point. Thank you, Amanda.

Okay, I'll amend my motion to include consultation with other stakeholders, including Elko County District Attorney's Office and Spring Creek Association. Second stance.

Okay, I have a motion and a second.

Thank you, Travis.

Any other discussions? Any public comment on this item?

Yes.

Hang on. Go ahead. You go ahead, Charles. Go ahead.

All right. So as Rick mentioned about the people that are out here with the wells, well, guess what? I am that poor guy. I have to deal with this every time. Out here in Rendon, there are a lot of people on fixed incomes. They cannot afford generators. Amanda mentioned REC. Well, guess what? That legislation was written specifically towards NV Energy. REC, since it's a cooperative, is exempt. One other item that needs to be brought up and noticed that we talk about hardening the infrastructure. Well, since 2012, NV Energy has wasted $68 million on political candidates. And all of that is online in the Secretary of State's website. So why are they wasting that money when they could be fixing the problems out here? And oddly enough, I found at least two elected officials that are in Elko County that have taken money from India. And, you know, it's, no, it needs to stop. And I challenge all the elected officials in this county and to, if they did get money from NV Energy, to give it back and not be bought. So, you know, something needs to be done to protect us because where does the wind blow? It comes straight out to Rennie. It comes straight out to Oakland. It comes straight out to White Rock. If there's a fire that starts in Elko because they left power on in Elko, we're up the creek. And this needs to stop. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Sure, thank you for your comments.

Go ahead. For the record, my name is Brian Riley. I live in Rendon, and my first thought was you were making me defenseless by shutting off the electricity. For the second, there are two volunteer stations out there also, Osino and Rendon. You're cutting them off. And as a member of the TV board, you are disabling the broadcast emergency system. that if anything else were to happen or the emergency to come out, they would not be alerted by their TV because they would be in the dark, literally. And that's my comment.

Thank you. Any other public comment? Do you have one, Jessie? Okay, sure, go ahead.

Jessie Barr, Spring Creek Association. I'm not going to go over everything you've already said because you hit all the highlights, but To Rex's point, I do think we do need the change to that plan and what that infrastructure might look like. Because I think some of these PSOM leaders are just doing what the plan's telling them, right? They're not able to change anything. They're not able to make those changes. They're doing what this exact plan says. So I'm hoping we can have some sort of working group or continue to have this on the agenda so we can get a true change in the operations. Maybe the plan, maybe the infrastructure. I understand that's going to take some time. But I think if there's true leaders in your organization that can help get to the bottom of that plan. Besides the comm team that you're going to be communicating with, I'd really like to have them involved at some point so we can look at isolating the system. Can we look at what future infrastructure looks like for some of these electric, you know, in Spring Creek, all of our infrastructure is underground and all the association except on the NDOT highway. And that's likely where we're having some of those issues. But I'd hope that we can you know, truly get to the meat of that plan. If the legislator says, I didn't research it enough, but if the legislator's saying you have to have a plan, did they approve that? You know, are we able to make changes to that? And let's get to some of that. Obviously, we're going to have to deal with it this fire season, but truly would like to change some of those. It's my understanding that PCUN approves the plan. PUCN, yep. So maybe that's, you know, next step with the county, helping with the PUCN. But I think if we could really continue to focus on this, and I'm glad you guys are on the same page about this because it affects so many people. Thank you.

Okay. Thanks, Jesse.

Any other comments?

Okay, everybody's clear on the motion. Paulina, you'll be hearing from Lee Cavness, so appreciate you joining us today. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Aye vote aye also. Motion carries. J. Elko County Public Works. J1, discussion and consideration of approval of Resolution 2026-25 related to the Montello Sewer Pond Relining Project and authorization for staff to submit an application to the Clean Water State Revolving Fund for the project.

Hi, guys. Hi. Thanks. Sienna Stearman, Elko County Grants and Contract Manager.

Les McNutt, Elko County Public Works.

Basically, to summarize what the resolution says, this resolution will allow designated staff to apply for a principal forgiveness loan through the state revolving fund for the Montello sewer pond realigning. Do you want to talk about the project at all as far as the state of it?

Well, the pond's a clay line pond, and it's a It's been noted that it leaks and it's in pretty sad shape. The sludge is to the surface. There's very little water coverage in it. There's been odor complaints. It's in bad need of being redone. It doesn't pass the smell test? It does not. The wind blows the right way most of the time.

I hope it's not in the well capture area. Gentlemen.

How big of a project are we talking about?

There's only one sewer pond and then an RIB that's currently not in use. So they'd be relining the pond completely. And there's no other plans to make it bigger or anything like that. It's basically going to be exactly where it's at.

If NDEP approves it.

If NDEP approves it.

And the rapid infiltration basin still is functional?

It's a, well, I don't know because no water is floating into it. Because the pond is an RIV.

I make a motion to authorize staff to submit an application to the Clean Water State Revolving Fund for the Montello sewer pond relining project.

Okay, I have a motion. Second. I have a second. Any other discussion?

Yeah, this is Chairman Rex again. I was just curious why we're having a motion to go for the grant and J2 is to hire somebody to do the work.

You're right. So J2 is to retain day engineering to help us with the technical memorandum as well as all the planning and design.

If it's approved.

If it's approved.

So that's only if we get the grant or we have another source of funding for that?

No, this would be included. The cost of day engineering, like retaining day engineering would be included in the principal forgiveness loan.

So Rex, what Sienna is saying is that we would only retain day engineering if we received the grant.

If we received the grant?

Yes.

Yeah, and I'll amend my motion to include approval of J2 contingent on approval of the grant.

NEW SPEAKER Thank you, Travis.

NEW SPEAKER I got a motion for J1 and J2. NEW SPEAKER Second. So we're talking about both at the same time? Okay. Now does that, Travis, does your motion include adopting resolution number 2026-25? Is that correct? Essentially the same thing. Okay.

The resolution authorizes staff to apply for the grant and basically make me the authorized representative to sign those applications.

Okay. So we're applying for the grant. If it's approved, then they can design it. Sounds good. Second stands.

Any second stands? Any other comment?

Just for the record, I do want to say that it's approved. Principal forgiveness loan, not a grant. Yeah.

For the record. And I'm glad you brought that up. This revolving fund has been used countless times by many counties across the state because it's the only way they can afford to put in these small systems. Exactly. Okay. Seeing no other questions or comments, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye.

Aye.

I vote aye also. Motion carries. Thanks, guys, for being here. Thank you. K, Lamoille Grove, K1 discussion, consideration of possible selection of a contractor to remove dead trees located within the remaining high-risk areas of Lamoille Grove Park, and to perform associated stump removal and authorization for staff to proceed with this project. We did get, I don't know if these totals on my agenda are correct, but I have Garrett Tree Surface, New Leaf Solutions, and Ruby Rose. I don't know. Do you want to read off? You have the correct amount, right?

So what is online is correct. So Garrett's Tree Service is a total approximate cost of $47,509. New Leaf would be $47,750. And Ruby Rose would be $45,703 or 704. Questions, comments?

Yeah, the question I have, do we want to contract this work done? Is it urgent that it happen rapidly, or can we wait until the fire department isn't so engaged with fires? I talked with Chief Matt Peterson, and he let me know that as far as tree removal goes, the work that they can do has been done. And so we would have to have somebody come in and remove the trees. But the stump removal... we could still work on that. Is that something that we are urgently in need of?

Well, the only thought that I have is if we, you know, it's nice to have a contract and get it done because we're talking about the high-rise trees. If we cut off a tree and leave a stump there, then there's some liability. You know, they're there. I think we should, and we don't know when Matt can get back there. I would just, I don't think, I think it's, you know, the whole cost is, you know, if we go with the lowest one is, 45,000 they're removing. I don't even know how many. These are like 20 some odd trees. It seems to be. And the stump removal you can see is in this bid is $313. I think it's, I don't think, I think to remove the liability is cheap. That's my point, my opinion.

I guess my only question, Mr. Chairman, would be, do we have that money somewhere?

We do.

Then I'd make a motion. We go with Ruby Rose.

Okay, have a motion. Do you need the motion to include where the revenue comes, or the fund comes from?

You can if you want to. We did budget it in capital for fiscal 27.

Okay. It's budgeted in capital, so I think we're okay.

Okay. Second. Did you have a second?

No, I do not. I do not.

Second. I'll second. And the difference, in case you're wondering, if there are 23... trees and 21 existing stumps at $313 a piece it would be $13,700 that we could possibly save if we were willing to wait and we wanted to accept that liability so never mind my second stance it's up to you

Travis, I thought maybe you had some comment or something you wanted to say.

Oh, I was just going to say the main cost is the removal of the trees, which are a liability. They're dead trees. They couldn't fall. And the fire department can't remove those, so I think we just proceed. And whether the fire department does the stump removal or we have a contractor, there's going to be costs to the fire department either way, so it's not a huge item. I think just get it done.

and that's the motion we have before us. So if there are no more comments or any public comment on this item. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye.

Aye.

I vote aye also. This is awarded to Ruby Rose Landscaping and Tree Service in the amount of $45,703.85. Okay, L, enhanced 911. L1, discussion consideration of approval of Motorola Solutions Flex Plus contract with terms of 12 months and a 12-month automatic renewal at a cost of $694,815. Lee, go ahead.

All right, Lee Chavness, Elko County Emergency Manager, Communications Manager. So I will, thank you Amanda, just if you could scroll down to the bottom of that pricing summary page So just a touch of a correction. So we did, I came before you at the last meeting, June 17th meeting was item H5, where we approved obligating this funding. This is now to proceed with the contract. So the first year cost of the contract is $492,082, which is less than the 500,000 approved. And then you'll see in years two through five that the cost is 197,488. about a hundred of that or 116 of that is already being paid by the sheriff's office the police department and the dispatch center so Like it is sub $100,000 of cost out of the you know one fund for the duration of that five-year contract which really brings the total out of the e911 fund to be eight hundred eighty two thousand zero thirty four and They're on the last line, so the total cost is 1.282, but the total cost out of the E-9-1 fund really would be about $882. So that funding has been approved and obligated, so we're now just asking to approve the contract.

Okay. Any questions or comments, concerns?

Yeah. Question, Lee. Go ahead. So how did we come up with the? The number $694,815. That I do not know. So you're looking for $492,082?

In year one, and then the continuing cost of up to $100,000 for years two through five.

It could have been clerical there, right?

Yeah, I think it's year one and two.

Oh, that's it. It's just year one plus year two. Is that 694? Yeah, we're pretty close to that So should the motion follow the pricing summary that we approved last night Or should the motion follow the agenda?

All right. Well, I'd recommend that you follow the pricing summary that we just gave you.

Okay Well, I move to approve this Motorola Solutions Flex Plus contract as presented according to the pricing summary that we accepted last time.

Thank you. Motion? I'll second. Any discussion? Comment? Any public comment? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye. Motion carries. Thank you. M, budgeted purchase approvals. M1, discussion consideration to approve the following Elko Justice Court capital purchases approved in fiscal year 2027 for a total of $76,980. It's a vehicle for $30,000, a case management system for $19,980, and a client service management consulting agreement with Tyler Technologies for $27,000. These funds are coming from the Justice Court Civil Fund with no monies requested from the general fund. Any questions, comments, concerns, or need any more? I know we have a representative here if you have any questions.

Is this new software that we don't already have, or is it just a replacement of existing software? What's the fiscal impact to adding these or replacing what we have?

So the new software that we're asking for is for the search warrant software. Right now we're signing a three-year contract. The civil funds should be able to carry it for that contract. When that contract is up, we're going to reassess and see where we're at.

Do you have software for search warrants already or is this new?

This is brand new.

Okay. What will it improve over the current system?

I think it's going to improve communication with the judges, getting all the paperwork in, getting the approvals, the search warrants to go through, just the communication between the detectives, the judges.

Christina, does that also include communication with central dispatch?

Currently, that is not in the plan.

Okay.

But it doesn't mean we can't do that.

I imagine it will also improve efficiency for the personnel that are preparing the search warrants, the officers and the judges, so it can all just be done seamlessly with probably a DocuSign or an electronic signature rather than faxing and printing and signing and returning, and so it'll free up more time for law enforcement.

Currently, we're doing a lot of emails back and forth. This system, it's all included in one system. The templates will be there to use. It should simplify things for everyone. And you're correct. It's all e-signature. And of course, you can still get hold of the judge by phone.

Just to comment, I remember when I was a court master and the justice of the peace would be out of town, I'd be the justice of the peace pro tem and I'd get these faxes in the middle of the night. So I'd have to get up, print them out, review them, sign them, rescan them, fax them back. So this would definitely be easier just to be able to do it on a phone or a tablet and click, you know.

Absolutely.

Probably have an electronic copy of it, too, as opposed to a hard copy.

Well, and we take that copy, and that's how we're going to build our cases in our current case management system. OK.

So with this new system, they're at no time are the warrants issued without approval of a judge.

Correct.

The judge reads it, makes sure there's the probable cause that it's reviewed by somebody other than law enforcement and signs off on it.

This just makes it 21st century.

Yeah.

Okay.

Kind of like what we did with E911, right?

Sure.

Not sure. I move to approve the expenses listed in M1. Okay. Motion?

I second.

I second. Any other discussion? Any public comment? All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

I vote aye also. Motion carries. Thank you. Contract approvals end. End one discussion consideration of ratification. This is a ratification of an interlocal contract between the 4th Judicial District Court, Family Court, and the State of Nevada Department of Health and Human Services Division of Welfare and Supportive Services for the continued administration of the title for the child support program with the term of July 2026 through June 30th, 2030.

So I don't believe this contract has ever come before the county commission, but it is a contract that we've had in place for a long time. Essentially what this agreement does is it allows for reimbursement for the family court master and support staff time spent on child support enforcement cases. And... Because it's a contract, we want to make sure that it's before you. This is similar to the contract that we have with the state for our child support division in the district attorney's office. Basically, we get reimbursed for 66 and two-thirds percent of salary and benefits for the time that they spend on these cases.

I don't think he has his mic on.

I'll make a motion to approve N1, the contract between 4th Judicial District Court and the Nevada Department of Health and Human Services for reimbursement. Second.

Motion and second. Any discussion? Any public comment? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. And I vote aye also. Motion carries. Thank you. Moving on to N2, discussion consideration of approval of a memorandum of understanding between United Way of Northern Nevada and the Sierra and Elko County Human Services for the participation in Project SAFE program for the period of July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2027.

This is again another program that we've had in place for a long time on our social services group Basically, it's a program that allows us to help individuals apply for utility assistance And we do get a little bit of money.

It's about eleven thousand dollars a year each year Yeah And to the MOU between United Way and the Elko County Human Services for the SAFE program.

I have a motion and a second. Any other discussion? Any public comment on this item? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye.

Aye.

I vote aye also. Motion carries. G. Oh, I'm sorry. O. Nevada State Public Health Funds. O1. Discussion and consideration of a ratification of the County Manager's authorization and disbursement of a donation of Nevada State PUBLIC HEALTH FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 TO THE NEVADA CLASSICAL ACADEMY, A NONPROFIT EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION UNDER SECTION 501C3 OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE TO ASSIST WITH REPLACEMENT OF AGING PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026 MAKING THE FINDINGS REQUIRED BY NRS 244-1505.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I NEED TO MAKE A DISCLOSURE BEFORE WE BEGIN THIS DISCUSSION. I served as chairman of the founding board for the school, but as it transitioned to the governing board, I dropped off that board. I no longer have anything to do with the day-to-day operation of the school and have no financial connection to it. RD has advised me that our legislature encourages elected officials to vote, not abstain, because abstention disrupts the normal course of representative government. My judgment will not be materially affected by my past association with the school. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, Amanda, if you want to give us a quick, I think it's pretty straightforward.

Yeah, I'll just give you a quick rundown. In the last legislative session, there were some public health funds that were approved, I believe, in the governor's budget. But nonetheless, we received about $123,000 for this year, and we'll receive $123,000 for next year. We hadn't had a plan necessarily to spend those dollars. And rather than returning those dollars to the state, we went out to see. sit on the board actually for Elko Federal Credit Union. And so this request came before the credit union. So I was aware of that. So we did reach out to the state to request permission. And essentially, as long as we can draw a correlation essentially to public health, which is what we've done with the resolution. They did authorize us to spend these funds in this way. And so I know that we have assisted the EIAA a bit and we've had some kind of internal conversations about how we can better support the charter schools and talking about how we might do that in the future. Rather than sending this money back to the state, I thought this would be a good use of that fund. And so I did already cut the check for that. I still have it in my office in case you decide not to approve it today. But the resolution, I think, says everything that we need to say.

Questions, comments?

I'll make a motion to approve O, the consideration and ratification of a donation of $100,000 to Nevada Classical Academy. of the Nevada State Public Health Funds. Second.

Okay. And I personally think it's a great use of those funds. I'll get to you in just a second. Any other commission comments? Rex, is there anybody? Go ahead.

I wanted to say, Amanda, thanks for handling that. Before the time ran out, we'd hate to miss that opportunity.

Okay, thanks. Anything else from the commission? Any other discussion?

Okay, public comment. Hank, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Hank Thurston. I serve as Board Treasurer of Nevada Classical Academy Elko. I'd like to thank Elko County and the Board of Commissioners for considering this proposal. I've been, and I think I speak for our board, for our staff and faculty, for our students and our families when I say I've really been humbled by the generosity, the extreme generosity that we've seen from this community. And I thank Elko County for finding a way to provide these funds to update some of our playground facilities. And we've done a lot of good things with the money that this community has given, and I'd like to let the commission know that we will continue to recognize that with that generosity from this community comes an indelible sense of responsibility on our part to make sure that we steward those funds and we provide for the public education of students here as best as we can. So thank you. Thanks.

And Hank, did you give your full name for the record? I'm sorry, I don't know if you did.

He did. Dr. Henry Matthew Thurston. Thank you, sir.

Okay, we have a motion to second. Any other public comments? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye. Aye.

I vote aye also. Motion carries. Thank you. Commission calendar.

Moved or approved?

I have a motion. Second. And a second. On July 15th, Rex, I'm getting this thing removed from my hand, so I won't be here.

Oh, okay. July 16th. 15th.

15th, yeah.

Okay.

Okay. Any other discussion? Public comment? All those in favor? Aye. Aye. I vote aye also. Motion carries. Let's see. We have... Uh-oh. Where am I here? Consent agenda. There it is.

Move to approve.

Got a motion. Second. And a second. Any other discussion? Public comment? All those in favor? Aye. Rex? You and I?

Aye. Sorry. Sorry. I was on mute.

Sorry. And I'm an aye also. Thank you. Commissioner, Commission Committee reports. Brian?

Okay, so Rex and I sit on the Humboldt River Basin Water Authority. We had a meeting between this meeting and the one two weeks ago, and they presented an omnibus bill that I would like to consider. One of the elements of the omnibus bill that Rex and I have talked about in detail, and I'd like to know the will of the board, provides for the establishment of countywide water boards. That's not the important part. The water boards would advise the Board of County Commissioners throughout all the counties of the state. That's one element of this omnibus bill. The more significant portion is it provides the county an opportunity to impose a tax on water use. So if you have a water right in the state of Nevada, then the county would be able to impose a tax up to $30 per acre foot annually, which that is a lot of money for me. in irrigation that's a lot of money or up to thirty dollars per well you know so for a culinary well for a house that doesn't seem like a big deal anyways so the question is should we impose or should we have the authority to impose the tax I'd like to discuss that one one of the benefits I would see is it would help us I can foresee it helping the counties in to bring their water usage into balance with the water rights. The problem being there are more water rights than there is water. We call that paper water. And I think it's absolutely immoral for senior water right holders to not get their right. And I see this tax as a method by which the county can bring that into balance. So that's my report. What does that mean? Should we put it on the agenda for next time or for a time in the future? We can contemplate it.

I don't know. I think if you want the board support, you've got to do that because we obviously can't.

say that now so well i don't see any i don't see any i'm not just talking about the board support i want to know what the will of the board is and i'd like to discuss it because i have some ideas in my own head but i don't i don't know if they would actually work like that or not and rex has got some good ideas in his head too rex you want to talk on that well yeah i i have about the opposite opinion as brian does again i think this is

Well, first of all, this is a bill draft request that's coming from the Humboldt River Basin Water Authority. So we would just be supporting their effort, I suppose. But I just, and I've asked Brian this, and I've asked the board that, what are we trying to fix? I want a specific example of what this County Advisory Water Board would help us solve. And I have never received an answer. And I just am adamantly opposed to raising taxes unless there's just a really important reason, like we did with our infrastructure tax and asset. So, you know, he's welcome to put that on the agenda to discuss, but I am not in support of it.

Brian, do you have a copy of that bill draft request? I can get it to you. That'd be great. Thanks.

So for clarification, is the state of Nevada bill draft request?

To the state of Nevada, yeah, from the Humboldt River Basin Water Authority. Okay.

I was just confused because omnibus made me think of federal.

Yeah, I'm not sure. There were a number of items, eight different items in this omnibus bill. I got it. Okay.

Thanks. Reports, Travis.

Rex.

Rex. Any reports, Rex?

Sorry, I went to mute again. Sometimes I have a hard time pushing that button. But no, I do not. Thank you.

Whoever you were talking to in the background, tell them we said hi.

All right.

And I don't have any reports this time either. So we'll go on to staff reports. Any staff reports?

Nothing at this time. Thank you. Anybody?

Okay. Last comments by the general public.

Going once, going twice.