City Council - Regular Meeting

All right, it's 2 o'clock. All right, let's call to order the Spark City Council meeting for March 9th with a roll call. Mayor Lawson here. Council members Abbott here. Vanderell here. Anderson here. Bybeby here. Rodriguez here. City attorney Duncan here. City manager Lousen here. We have a quorum. Thank you. Okay. Uh Paul, will you lead us in the invocation? I will.

Please stand and join me. Heavenly Father, we thank you for this beautiful day. We thank you for blessing us with uh freedoms that we have uh that other uh people around the world do not. And Lord, we just pray for those that are defending our freedoms uh locally as well as across the world. We just thank you for them and pray for their safety. I thank you, Father God, for being with us. pray for your wisdom over all of us as we make decisions today as well as um just be with all of those that are serving the city of Sparks day in and day out uh giving them safety and and uh rest as they need it. And I just pray, Father God, that uh you do this all in the name of Jesus. Amen.

Amen. Mr. Rodriguez, will you lead us in the pledgece 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. Okay, moving on to public comment. Um, Walt Rosenberg, followed by Mike Davis.

Good afternoon, mayor, council members. My name is Walt Rosenberg. I'm here to honor you and the processes like this. I'm going to hand something to you by a handshake. I ask you not to open your hand, not to show it around to anyone until after I give our city attorney uh his handshake. The mayor is going to go first and then I'll start down at this end. Thank you. Oh, yeah. And I've got some hand cleaner in case you need it.

Thank you, sir. No, thank you.

Thank you. You sir, sir. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Okay, that's it. Now you can tell everyone what I gave. I know Paul knows what it is. Challenge points.

United States Navy. Vietnam veteran. Pretty cool. Thank

very nice. Thank you, Walt.

You're welcome. Okay. Mike Davis followed by Shantel Hendrickx. Mayor, City Council. Uh, good afternoon. My name is Mike Davis. I'm a homeowner and sitting board member of Wingfield Springs HOA. I'm here to oppose the proposal to build homes on the Red Hawk Blakes Golf Course in Wingfield Springs. The golf course is not vacant land. It's a central amenity for a master plan community. One that shapes the approval and marketing and decision homeowners make when they purchase here. People bought into Winkfield Springs because it was designated and represented as a golf centered community. Removing that amenity now breaks those commitments and undermines the integrity of the planning process that built this neighborhood. The course also plays a critical environmental role. It absorbs storm waters from multiple basins, reduces heat, and provides a natural buffer between neighborhoods. Replacing it with replacing the dense housing with dense housing increases runoff, flood risk, traffic, strain on roads, schools, utilities, and emergency services. There is no infrastructure plan that offsets these impacts and the long-term cost will fall on the current residents, not the developer. Property values are also at stake. Homes along the course paid a premium for golf footage,

frontage, and open space. Eliminating the course removes the very amenity those homeowners relied on and it changes the characters of the Winkfield Springs in a way that cannot be undone. This is not only opposing this is not about opposing growth. It is about protecting the promise that shaped this community, ensuring responsibility, responsible planning, and preventing a short-term de development profit for from creating long-term harm. A golf course is a defining feature of Winkfield Springs, and once it's gone, it's gone forever. I respectfully urge the commission to reject the proposal and preserve the integrity, safety, and identity of the community. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Gentle Hendris, followed by Katherine Ry.

Good afternoon. I support second everything that was just said. I'm also here to talk about Wingfield. Uh my focus though is property values to start with. We have lived out there for uh 20 well 25 years. We bought in 2000 when it was the edge of the earth and you drove way out on a two-lane road and the builder was giving me free things in the house to please come buy a house out here because there were no stores, there were no restaurants. There was nothing going on and people who came out are now getting the biggest slap in the face. So, after 24 years of living out there, building that uh kids going to school out there, my husband and I bought a lot and built a home in 24, moved in at December 24 and here we are today. I would never have bought that lot if I thought that there were going to be track homes behind me. Not only is the lot kind of short because visually the golf course was our backyard, we would now have a fence like right here with homes peering into our yard. I'm sure there's going to be plenty of two stories. Um it just seems like a slap in the face to to move out there uh by the interior of a developed area. So not even on a perimeter where you can expect the next highway, Walmart, etc. over time, even though they always say that's never going to happen, it does happen. We buy in the interior and then here we are. We our house like should not be there. It just it makes no sense to have that house on that lot with the people right behind us. Uh everything that was said about traffic, all that is a thousand% true. But I would just like to say ple please support the people that supported Sparks when there was not a lot going on out there and now we're saying you know can we get something in return for our loyalty staying here paying the taxes kids going to school

doing all the events and then end up with a house that we'd like to maybe have to move out of and then you know the prices are just so different now we have people on our street trying to sell my husband and went down to an open house and realtor's like great house and it is beautiful, meticulous. Soon as that little disclosure comes out about, well, by the way, there may be some building back there. It's it's done. So, you know, people need to sell could be hard to do unless you want to have a fire sale. So, that's it. Thank you very much. Thank you, Katherine Riyles, followed by Craig Krueger.

Good afternoon, everyone. I oppose Katherine Riyles for the record. I oppose the selloff of public lands. I oppose the Northeast connector. I oppose the Vista Fire Station being closed. I oppose 764 new homes at Red Hawk. Nevada is known for our large amount of public lands, the beauty of wide open spaces, sea of sage brush, lush thick forest, high mountain tops, creeks, streams, rivers, reservoirs, lakes, and so much more. Tourists come to Nevada from all over the country. They come to recreate, hunt, fish, take in incredible landscapes, catch a rare sighting of so many species of wildlife, photograph wild horses and burrows. Nevada is special, and it needs to be preserved for future generations. I'm quite concerned to hear Nevada has no money to improve existing roads, keep a fire station fully operational. Law enforcement is being stretched thin, and prison guards are working a great deal of overtime. Why hasn't Nevada used the pandemic funds to widen I80 or improve Highland Ranch? The state of Nevada rainy day fund has a surplus, I'm sorry, a surplus of $1.24 billion. Is the money sitting in the account to make Nevada or someone look good or to be utilized for much needed essential services? City of Sparks has closed the Vista Fire Station right next to Golden Eagle Sports Complex. Is the city of Sparks aware of the many sports teams playing at the complex? Are they aware there is target shooting taking place daily on the nearby ranges? Are they aware of all the children playing at the park? Are they aware of all the previous fires in the surrounding area? I just can't figure out why a muchneeded fire station would be taken away. There has been a big push to sell off Nevada public lands all across the state. Selling off public land should be an absolute last resort. Why are there huge warehouses sitting empty all across our state? Why isn't development taking

place in the cities that have land available? Why aren't the counties with the data centers warehouses providing needed homes for child care and other resources for the employees working in their counties? Nevada is the driest state in the nation. Lake me has a critical low. Why isn't there a concern for Nevada's water supply? Well drillers are digging deeper wells. Water has been hauled out to wildlife. Emergency wild horse and burough roundups have taken place. What is happening to our groundwater? What is happening to our water on public lands? Every water source on private or public lands needs to remain untouched, not filled in, not diverted, and not removed. Our water is crucial in Nevada. It is a complete shame what is transpiring in Nevada. The RTIC USA Parkway area has been taken over by data centers and warehouses. The Nightingale range, exit 65, has been taken over by solar panels and equipment. Now the power range is on a chopping block. Stop taking away our open spaces. It is time to stop making deals with developers. Once our land, wildlife, wild horses, burrows, and water is gone. It's gone forever. Thank you. Thank you. Fred Krueger, followed by Jim Kness. Good afternoon. My name is Fred Krueger and I have 39 years of uh federal government and state government, both uh yes, US Forest Service. And some people tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, but I can tell you after uh 32 years of government experience, I know a little bit if not more of the bureaucracy. I want to commend all of you for doing a very difficult job. Uh it's not easy. I want to especially thank Charlene BBE for returning my calls and personally discussing the

Northeast Connector Project as well as Senator Rosen's land bill. Uh, my HOA members have told me that she has also answered their calls and emails. Good for you, Charlene. Um, I'm aware that a majority of the council is most likely aware, most likely in favor of Rosen's land bill, which would develop areas east of Sparks. And I think that will be a bad mistake, as well as the Northeast connector that I oppose. Uh because as other people have said, once the resources are gone, they're gone. And I don't think the city of Sparks needs another USA parkway. From the standpoint of the city council, Sparks and the RTC, I've been to both meetings and I don't see a lot of discussion between the two groups, at least in the minutes and and when the discussions and the meetings are going on. And I think communications is very key uh when the impacts are are that could occur are so great. In the past, Spark City Council has approved many wonderful neighborhoods. And I truly feel it's your responsibility, all of you, to protect and serve those residents that are in those communities. It was approved. We have a high quality of life that's there. and the Northeast Connector and Rosen's bill will degrade that lifestyle immensely. It's your job to protect and serve and there's a lot of voters that are watching what's going on at the upcoming preliminary and November election. Um, I would like to know if members of the city council have ever toured the area east of Sparks before anything is done there. I think it's very important. I learned very early on in my career that if you haven't seen it on the ground, all four corners, it's really hard to support anything when you haven't seen it on the ground. So, I would like to

know that if anyone has reviewed that. Lastly, I just want to note to you, I I follow in the past and I'm old, I admit it, Dr. Laura Slesinger Slesinger, and she always had some famous quotes. And number one, her first quote was because it's possible to do and you have the right to do it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. Number two, secondly, she always signed off of her programs when she she always said do the right thing. So, two quotes to keep in mind for the day. Thank you for your time. I sincerely appreciate it.

Thank you. Okay. Uh Jim Kindness followed by Jerry and Irma. Are you Mayor Lost and members of the city council, Jim Kinus, resident of Wefield Springs and Sparks. mayor to express my complete disappointment to you removing the fire engine from fire station 5. Station 5 has been staffed with a fire apparatus capable of extinguishing fire for 21 years. You have left Winfield Springs and the surrounding areas with a long response from another station which may cost someone their home and possibly their life. Your answer was to leave an ambulance at station 5. That ambulance averages four to six calls per day with three to four transports to hospitals. This leaves that ambulance out of district and unable to respond to calls for 5 to six hours per day. That's 5 to six hours with no efficient fire protection or EMS coverage. I'm not here to question fiscal con constraints, but I am questioning your priorities. Public safety should be number one. Safety of your residents and visitors should take priority. In October, you approved $1.4 million to replace turf on three outfields at Golden Eagle Park. I asked you to take the time to walk those fields as I did so you would know they didn't need to be replaced. I met with Councilwoman Bobby who stated the city manager said it was a liability to not replace them. Question: What's a higher liability? Turf on a baseball field are failing to provide fire and EMS protection for your citizens. I did some research and pulled a public records request which confirmed my thoughts. Your turf turf should be replaced when the average GMAX is over 200. The infields of these three fields were replaced in 2019. The results. Two out of the three outfields did not need to

be replaced. And the third is questionable. Field 11, which is pictured highest GMAX was 194. Nothing over 200 and most substantially lower. Field 12, one spot outside the foul line with a 200 Gmax, one spot in right field with 209 GMAX. Two areas in the infield which were worse than the outfield and that turf was not replaced. Is that a liability? I question. Field 15, ISG max was 170 in right field and 183 in foul grounds. Infield had one area that was 198 and not replaced. Nothing over 200. 1.4 million blown over turf that didn't need to be replaced. While our fire station is stripped of the apparatus capable of extinguishing a fire, many expenditures out of the general fund could have been used to staff both fire stations five and six. These expenditures like replacing turf were nicities, not necessities. If you can find 1.2 million to pay for shot spotter, you can find the money to staff a critical need for public safety. Another example, for almost 3 years, you have filled the emergency manager position with a division chief from the fire department, costing how much annually? 300 400,000 before Neil Cruz became city manager. This position was handled by city manager Steve Driscoll at a zero cost to the city. The minute you knew there was a budget shortfall, this position should have been turned back over to the city manager and the funds used to staff the new fire station. City manager Lan, I challenge you to put public safety first and take over emergency management and use the funds to staff our fire stations. Now is a perfect time as you have an open battalion chief's position so nobody needs to be demoted or lose their job. My family, friends, and community in Wingfield Springs deserve better. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Jerry and I goan followed by John Asin.

Good afternoon, mayor, city council members. So, my husband and I are here to bring to your attention a very very important and life and safety concern that's happening in our neighborhood. And I'm just going to read the the uh submitt that I that we did to the code enforcement division and uh copied the u senior planner, Miss Sienna Reed, which she did answer. Thank you for that. Okay, so I'm just going to read it. We are submitting this complaint regarding a public nuisance, an ongoing hazardous condition originating from the adjacent golf course located at DeAndrea Golf Course. And then there's we also submitted an attachment of the assessor's records that is directly bordering or residential property at 2610 of our court sparks Nevada under Sparks Municipal Code related to nuisances unsafe properties and hazardous activities. This reoccurring I'm sorry. This recurring condition constitutes a violation requiring mitigation. Prior written notices have gone unressed and an injury has occurred. This is no longer a civil or HOA matter. This is a public nuisance and life and safety concern due to the hazardous conditions which are very much predictable. Sparks Municipal Code Chapter 7.16 Nuisances section 7.16.010 subsections DD David 178E Edward 1 2 as well as the definitions. Okay. And so what those say public nuisance means any of the following conditions subsection

one attractive nuisance any area structure or object which by its nature location and or character would tend to attract and endanger and safe the safety of any minor person. David, one second. There's a lot on this nuisance. If you guys take a look at it, um, you will see. One second. Uh, D7 and 8. Chronic nuisance. one, when three or more nuisance activities exist or have occurred during and any 30-day period. And then there's more, but let me just go on with this. But take a look at that section of your municipal code. Okay? Golf balls are entering our yard several times daily. This is not an occasional or isolated incident. The frequency is consistent and predictable, creating a recurring of high velocity projectiles. Can my husband continue?

We didn't have a card for you. You want if you want to fill out a card, we'll take you in. Okay. We'll come back to the next meeting. Thank you. Okay. Appreciate that. No problem.

Don Hassel, Mayor Lawson, and council, thank you for having me here and thank you for all you do. You do a lot. We appreciate that. I've worked with Paul Anderson on this matter. It's the same matter that was just presented. We lived adjacent to a golf course. For three years, I petitioned the golf course, the HOA, to put in golf netting, and I have been not allowed to do that. The HOA is stating that the PUB handbook and the CCNRs do not allow it. I can't protect myself. Golfers have the ability to hit a ball wherever they want and whenever they want and can hit my house, my h my wife, which they have. They can put balls in our house. We've had one come through our front room window and in the house. We've had glass shatter by my wife while we were in the house. Um it it it's unmaterial to me. You can't protect yourself in regards to this. In addition to that, we've had another HOA above us that has gone ahead and allowed with the same PUD handbook and the same CCNRs to put netting in. This is life and safety. We we are afraid to go in our backyard. We have balls whizzing by our head. I have presented pictures to Paul with five fivegallon buckets from this year alone from not I'm sorry 25 alone that we have had that many balls in our yard. Other golf courses allow protection. They have netting up there. They are not

citing a a CCNR or a PUB handbook that says you can't direct netting. I had a discussion with our design committee chair for the HOA and I asked him point blank. He said to me, "We can't allow this place to look like Stead." And I said to him, "So the aesthetic value of the golf course has more value than the life and safety of people who live next to a golf course." And his response was, "Yes." I'm perplexed. Okay. I'm being told that the golf course won't do anything. I've petitioned them several times, many times. That the HOA won't allow me to put golf netting up. And the city won't enforce what we think should be practical, realistic, and life safety issues for those who are in situations as ourselves. I would like to hear from the city if a variance could be occurring from the design committee of the HOA in regards to life safety matters to protect ourselves from balls that come near and on our heads. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else in the public wishing to speak? Okay. Just uh as an aside, I know it's frustrating for a lot of you on the Red Hawk. It is against the law for us as a council to comment on any application prior to us hearing it. So, I know it's frustrating. I get it. But if we comment on it, that's called prejudicing the app, and we do not want to do that. So, please bear with us. The hearings are happening. you're going to have at least three hearings to uh voice your opinion and uh we'll get it out then. But I just wanted to to make sure I mean selling houses seems like a drastic measure to me but uh we'll see how this all works out in the end. All right, with that then we're going to move on to uh approval of the agenda. Mr. Anderson.

Yes, sir. I move to approve the agenda with the following changes and that is to uh remove agenda items 9.2, 2, 9.5, and 9.11. Okay, Mr. Abbott. Second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. I. Thank you, Miss By. Motion carries unanimously. I'm looking for approval of the minutes. Any additions, corrections, subtractions for the minutes? If not, I'm looking for a motion. Miss Vanderwell. I move to approve the minutes of the Spark City Council meeting for February 23rd, 2026. Mr. Rodriguez. Second.

A motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. I motion carries unanimously. Uh announcements, presentation, recognition items, board and commission vacancy announcements, Sparks Charter Committee. Madame Clerk.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. There are multiple vacancies on the Sparks Charter Committee. Members must be Sparks residents and registered to vote and applications will be accepted until March 11th, 2026 at 5:00 p.m. Persons interested in serving on any committee should complete a community services application online at the city's website, www.c cityofspsparks. us/getinvolved. Simply complete the volunteer application form and hit submit. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you very much. All right, let's move on to consent items. Anyone wishing to pull a consent item? If not, looking for a motion. Mr. Rabbit, I move to approve agenda items 8.1 and 8.2 as submitted. Miss Vanderwell. Second.

Okay, I've got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. I motion carries unanimously. Uh 9.1 Consideration discussion of possible approval of a building officials appointment to the building code board building code board of appeals from the following pool of applicants listed in alphabetical order. Joey Gancer Cliff Springmemire, Mr. Rundle.

Thank you, Mayor, City Council. This uh item provides the opportunity for the council to consider the building official recommendation. The build board of appeal board of appeals is set up. So if there's the decision of the building official that the someone would like to challenge it can come to the board of appeals for that due process. Mayor, the staff's recommendation, the building officials recommendation is to appoint Joey Gazner to as the electrical engineer to represent on the Sparks building code of appeals. If there is question and one thing, Jim Rundle, community services director. Thank you. Thank you. Questions from the council.

Okay. Then if not, I'm looking for a motion. Mr. Anderson. I move to approve the building officials recommendation of Joey Gan Ganzer as the electrical engineer or electrical contractor representative to the Sparks Building Code Board of Appeals for a 2-year term ending March 31st, 2028. Mr. Rodriguez. Second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. I.

Thank you. Motion carries unanimously. 9.3 Consideration discussion of possible approval of a roadway configuration for the RTC Prader Way rehabilitation and road diet pro project generally located east of Pyramid Way to Probasco.

All right. Well, good afternoon, Mr. Mayor. Hello, Mr. Council. And Jen, your transportation manager. Today, we have an updated presentation following up from our previous December 8th, 2025 meeting on RTC's Fightway project. As requested by council, city staff, as well as the team at RTC has gathered and summarized all the findings and input from all stakeholders to provide council guidance with this action item. Again, we bring back RTC project manager Kim Deagle who will share more details and updates on the project. Kim,

thanks Andrew. Again, Kim Deagle, project manager with RTC. So, council requested deeper community engagement and education on road diets and their trade-offs. Since December, we've conducted extensive outreach and gathered valuable community feedback. Today, we're seeking your direction on the striping configuration to proceed with construction this summer. So, this $6.7 million project is part of RTC's 2026 pavement preservation program funded by RTC fuel taxes. The Pyramid Way to Stanford Way section requires full reconstruction due to pavement failure while Stanford Way to Provasco Way will receive slurry seal and striping modifications. Safety is our top priority. This Praderway segment has experienced 105 crashes and three fatalities between 2019 and 2023 with a history of speeding and lacks safe multimodal facilities. Our design alternatives address these critical safety needs while completing necessary pavement work. So we engage the community through multiple channels. our project website with a virtual presentation, frequently asked questions about road diet. Uh we had a comment form online, and then we uh held a public information meeting at Lincoln Park Elementary School in January 2026. In February 2026, we also held a pop-up event at city hall. We also distributedformational mailers, placed newspaper ads, and conducted social media outreach. Public comments were accepted from January 6th to February 12th. So overall, we received 27 written comments that showed divided but meaningful feedback. 44% supported the road diet. 41% expressed concerns

primarily about traffic congestion and 51% were neutral or raised conditional concerns. This input did shape our final recommendations. The primary concern was traffic congestion which is absolutely understandable given growth throughout Sparks. However, our analysis tells an important story. While Sparks is growing overall, Crater Way is built out and not really experiencing much traffic growth itself. Traffic analysis during peak hours, including school drop off and pickup times, shows increased delay during these periods, but that's not all day. The level of service will decline decline from D to E with an estimated travel time increase of approximately 35 seconds during those peak hours which is a modest delay outweighed by uh the safety benefits. Also track traffic signal timing is important um key component to these improvements as well. We do not foresee this delay being significant enough to create more cutthrough traffic, but I would like to take this opportunity to promote the Central Sparks neighborhood network plan, which does propose traffic calming strategies for both I Street and upstream. Importantly, emermergency access vehicles um access is not impacted because the center turn lane and roadway footprint remain unchanged. Sparks police and fire departments support this configuration. We heard from the community that safety enhancements are vital to this project. Residents reported witnessing multiple numerous crashes. One resident saw over 10 crashes since she moved here in 2020, including two with parked cars directly in front of their homes. And really three critical themes emerged. One was maintaining and improving on street parking and safety and also backing safety from those

residences. Um enhancing bike and pedestrian safety. Um previously we have counted up to 28 bicyclists at Crater and Fourth Street in one day and that's without back bike lanes at all and also addressing speeding concerns. This corridor serves residences, a senior living community, the post office, city hall, and a middle school. It should not feel like a highway. Um to quote one of the the residences who made comment, beyond the road diet improvements include uh sidewalk widening from four to 5 ft minimum, adjusted utility covers for smoother travel, enhanced crosswalks with pedestrian refuge islands and audible rapid flashing beacons at Shriber at Dworth Middle School. Um new crosswalk near Dworth uh the bike racks on Marian Way. a new flashing beacon at Sanford Way and additional speed limit signs. Responding to a resident concerned about right turn traffic at Fourth Street, we're adding right turn conflict striping to prevent backup shown in the bottom of the screen there. So based on our comprehensive analysis, the road diet configuration is recommended because it reduces crashes by an estimated 34% annually, aligns with adopted regional plans, including the 2016 Sparks comprehensive plan and others, incorporates extensive community feedback, and it can be modified in the future if needed through preventative maintenance projects.

All right, thank you, Kim. As Kim has summarized, the benefits of the road diet configuration outweighs other negative impacts. Although there is an increase in traffic delays, we are creating a more inclusive and safer facility for all road users traversing through Prader Way. And with that, staff recommends the approval of the proposed lane striping configuration, the road diet option as outlined on exhibit three for RTC's praaway rehabilitation project as part of the 2026 RTC pavement preservation program. And we are happy to answer any questions. Questions from the council. Mr. Abbott,

you have a couple. Um, so looking at the the alternative option of going back to well I wouldn't say going back but maintain two lanes of travel each way. What would trigger that? Like I guess what parameters like would it be us saying hey let's go back or city staff suggesting it? Would it be car? I don't know.

Yeah, we have that um just so you we can discuss it a little bit more up on the screen. Um, I think that could be dependent on council. I think if we um come back in the future and we're seeing really detrimental traffic, something changes in our traffic patterns um to where you know, in the future um traffic is not what we anticipated it to be, um you know, then we then potentially coming to council um would be an option kind of as we are now to say, hey, this is a real real problem and something we want to consider in the future. understanding there's drawbacks to this alternative as well. Um but something we can consider and generally RTC does our um pavement preservation program um I'm sorry a preventative maintenance program for slurry seals every 3 to 5 years or so. So around that time would be a time we would come back and slurry and potentially change

because then we would be looking if it doesn't work we're looking on 3 to 5 years to possibly change it again.

Okay. And then if I have one more before I give it up y'all. Uh, I will say a definitely a big thank you for having all the the public meetings and all and letting us kind of take another look at it. Um, I know obviously I live right near here. These are my neighbors that I will say are very, you know, obviously it's kind of a mixed bag looking at the comments. They're a lot of them are very thankful of just having those meetings because they had a lot more concerns u that I don't think would have been addressed until probably later and they realized that those concerns were not legitimate concerns. There were just a little confusion there. So, big shout out to both of y'all and the whole team for uh for doing that. Um, one of my questions is just making sure that I understand on looking from Stanford to Babasco. I know we're not going to do any changes besides slurry ceiling and painting some new lines. Uh, just to make sure it's confirmed. Uh, it would be a bike lane there to connect that whole section. Correct.

Yes. To connect the other side of Freightway as well. I figured. I just know it's all right. All right. there. So, cool. I'll pass on to any of my colleagues. Mr. Rodriguez, thank you, Mayor. Um, sorry if I missed it. I remember like one of my questions was like, uh, rib cook off, high volume traffic, you know, events, stuff like that. Um, I'm sorry if I missed that in your presentation. Was any of that looked at or addressed?

Yes. So, it was in the packet. We had a response to that. So typically in traffic analysis we don't usually incorporate se special events because it's usually a oneoff event that we don't want to design the road based on this just one special event. We want to uh replicate what is normal traffic throughout the year. Okay. So I guess like when we do have those events I mean maybe like one more step question just to control that traffic but staff can look at it and we can do some modifications as needed.

Yeah. Um, and then I guess like the timeline uh like you know when this is approved and whatnot like uh for the motoring public and u Councilman Abbott's uh neighbors like what would be the timeline on this? Uh yeah, so we're um looking to go out to bid uh in just about a month from now and start construction hopefully in June of this year. Um we're wanting to do it in just one kind of summer construction season ideally when all the school traffic is not there, school's out. um at that time and then finish through paving um by the fall of this year. So, thank you, Mr. Anderson.

No questions. I just want to thank first uh City of Spark staff that have been working on this as as well as RTC, especially on the the public input side and getting them involved. um you guys did a wonderful job of of communicating very clearly um and transparently what what the intent was and and helping to answer their questions. And I just wanted to say out of some of those that I'm confident made notes that they were against it. Um I talked to several of them after the event after you explained it all and took the time walking them through on the map. Um they were all comfortable with what you had intended for for their neighborhood. So, I just want to say thank you and and yeah, I I think it's a great idea. Appreciate it.

Mrs. Fanderill, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just I'd like to have a question between uh the 44 You had 44% support the road diet and then you had 41% with traffic concerns. What were the major traffic concerns?

The major traffic concern was overall congestion being concerned that, you know, the backup was going to increase so much that it would be a severe detriment. Um, which is a vital concern. I mean, we, you know, we are going to see a bit of a slowdown, especially during those peak times. Um, and we talked through that and talked about how, you know, it's it's a balance. We have to kind of decide what what's most important to this community, this the context of this road. Um, I think our traffic signal timing is going to play into that a lot so that we can ensure that, you know, when we do see those slower times that signal timing can help push people through Prader um as quickly as we can. But um that's really you know the main thing you know people um are concerned about longer traffic times through through the corridor which is understandable. And then the second thing was um a couple of people definitely noted the cut through traffic concerns. We talked about a lot of that you know on their individual neighborhood streets. Um I think some of them are seeing that now with current construction going on along Pyramid and things. So of course it's um frustrating for them and and during construction they might see some of that as well. Um ultimately we don't feel like it would be enough to be a concern. Um but we do have some great proposed improvements that you know we'd love to see happen in Sparks with some other especially on F Street and I Street which would probably be your your you know potentially main um roads that cut through traffic might happen on. So

thank you. Yeah. Okay. Anyone else?

Go ahead. Um, well, definitely I know initially I was not the most thrilled with this. I I I'll be honest, I'm still not jumping with tons of joy, but I will say I appreciate the comments of us kind of working through it through it all. As a cyclist myself, I would love to see more people riding their bicycles along Prader. Um, and I think of when I do ride east, I will cut through the neighborhoods to get to Prader because I won't ride that section because it scares me. Um, so I do see the value of us increasing hopefully some rider share on bicycles. Um, I will also say, you know, uh, as someone obviously that resides right there, I know some of my neighbors might not be the the happiest, but I will, as if any of them are listening or here, um, I will say I think it is worth worth the chance of, you know, let's exploring this, you know, let's not just say no. If it doesn't work, you know, we can come back, we can relook at it. And also, you know, when we're looking at safety and, you know, the if we can save a couple lives out of all this, I think that's the big win here. I I get no one wants to wait in line to go anywhere really and let alone driving in traffic, but if we can improve that safety and that's where I kind of hang my hat is this I see the safety side of it and that's what's most important of and I appreciate you all looking at that. Um, and then you know, no joke, but I think we can all really appreciate the AT&T vault being fixed and we don't have the pothole in the middle of Prader Way that I've dealt with from 10 years. Um, so I do see that improvement as well. I got to put a joke in here and there, that's for sure. So, I'm good. And I can make a motion if we are good to go to move on.

One more moment. I want to see if Miss Bbeby has any comments.

Um, no, I'm good. And I do appreciate all of the uh public input that we got. Um, one thing that as I look at the road diet, um, a lot of uh, sessions I've been at at National League of Cities and they talk about uh, traffic calming. One of the traffic calming methods that is really effective is narrowing uh, narrowing streets so they're not as wide in speedways. that when you narrow them that the speeds go down. And so that would be my hope for this project for residents to be able to get out uh for the bike lanes but also to uh cut down on the speed. Uh so that would be the safety part of it you're talking about. So thank you all for all the work you've done on this. And even though I don't get a vote, I I like the bicycle path and because I do like to ride my bike and going to Reno is much easier if you don't have to have that section. I like the idea. We're not married to it. If it doesn't work, we can make admit that it doesn't work and move on and restripe it back. So, it's a good program, I think, and well thought out and I appreciate all you guys' time and especially after we had a little noticing food pot to come back and do it all over again. Uh, I I appreciate that part, too, so everybody had a chance to comment. So, with that, I'm going to let Councilman Abbott make a motion.

Um, I move to approve RTC of Washer County's lane lane stripping configuration option titled road diet as outlined in the in exhibit 3 of this agenda item for the RTC's Praderway rehabilitation project. Mr. Rodriguez, second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. I motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much.

9.4 Consideration discussion of possible approval of a street and highway interlocal cooperative agreement AC 6180 with the regional transportation commission RTC of Wo County and their FY2027 programs and projects. Mr. Keller.

Good afternoon, mayor, council members. For the record, Dale Keller, deputy executive director and director of engineering at the RTC. I can go full screen. All set. Great. So, the item presented before you this afternoon is the fiscal 2027 street and highway projects for your consideration. um as long as the approval of this interlocal cooperative agreement that identifies the responsibilities of these projects with inside the city of Sparks. Um and this is also a three-party agreement with coordination of Wo County as well. So where does this all fit in? This slide illustrates the regional transportation planning process. Uh we are at the project authorization step highlighted in orange. At this step, city council authorizes the RTC to begin the design, then ultimately construction of these projects that have been identified in that blue bucket in the regional transportation improvement plan or the RTIP. That's really our five-year capital improvement plan. Uh, this approval of the ICA allows staff to begin the funding of these uh of these projects in our annual budget, that last step in purple, and proceed with our project delivery. Pro project authorization is governed under interest 373 which outlines the criteria used by the RTC board to actually identify and select these projects based off regional planning uh relative of need and ultimately available funding. Uh the A is a three-step authorization project process. So back in December the RTC board approved it. It went to the board of county commissions, approved the funding back in February and then here we're here today requesting uh the city authorize RTC to perform the work on your behalf. So currently and taking a step back um out of that five-year plan there are currently 44 RTC projects that are

identified in the next 5 years. So that's fiscal year 25 through 29. Uh of those 34 approximately 77% of those projects already have ICAS in place. We're actually accomplishing a lot. We're in 27, so we're halfway through and we're over 77% actually actively working and delivering these projects and getting them um on the road. Uh projects selected for these ICAS are prioritized through the RTP through our scoring tool and then are prioritized based on that funding availability. I think it's important to highlight too talk about the RTC Street highway program overall is that we don't own or operate any of the roadways, but we do administer the regional program on behalf of all the local partners. So, as important as we go through this, we're all governed by this RTC management policy P64, which allow us to vary making sure we equivalent that we're spending money uh equal across all jurisdictions. So for this uh fiscal year coming up, this A continues to deliver our improvements through three regionwide annual programs. The first one being the payment preservation reconstruction program. Second is the traffic operations and intersection improvements and the last one was a new program we started last year is the active transportation program. So these programs allow the region to both address the system overall to preserve our good roads and then target other operational safety needs in these hotspot areas. So for 27 uh we are proposing that roughly about 22.5 million be spent on payment preservation program and these projects are selected by our payment preservation uh group which is from our public works directors and our city engineers and through performance schools of our roadways. In addition, we're proposing to spend $10 million on traffic operations and intelligent transportation systems or its which projects are prioritized through the traffic operations and

management group which is comprised of all the traffic engineers of the region. And lastly is our active transportation program. We're proposing $5 million uh to focus on quick build improvements identified through these neighborhood network plans. Recall we did neighborhood network plans one and two and one was Central Sparks and we're looking to get that under construction here. this summer. More to come, more public outreach to come later in the next few months, but we're excited to move those quick bills forward. They're also moving forward on that next round of our neighbor our next neighborhood network plans three and four. So, this is project focused on what's upcoming, but it's I would like to highlight actually what we have in the hopper, what actually we are moving to forward and all the yellow cones and orange cones you see on our roadways and cities parks right now. So, uh this is a highlight. These are calendar years. what we've actually started in moved in from design into construction actually into completion that was under construction 25 and now complete. Uh some of those I want to highlight is the Legends roundabout modifications. We've seen that be a tremendous success more clear about what lane you need to be in there. More safety, more awareness of exactly where to get to and how. Um also we saw intersection improvements in Vista and DISC which helps some of the operation movement especially in the morning commute. and also some of them continue to invest in our fiber um and also with your traffic engineer um your transportation manager Andrew Jer how to help operate and move our vehicles more efficiently. We have a laundry list of projects that are under design in 2025 and here's the projects that we move forward in construction. Uh we'll see a preventative project here off La Pasada. We'll we just talked about the quick builds in Central Sparks with our neighborhood network plans. Uh we just had a good conversation about prayer wave receives direction. You saw the interassive schedule we have with Kim and her team. Uh we have an evil kina safety which I know is outside of our city limits but I think it's important to the sparks community especially with

the high school. Um in addition we have some improvements on sparks ion and new traffic signals going in and the list goes on and on. So we're excited with the program that we have moving forward into construction this year. Uh with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions and uh happy to talk about any projects that we have in our program. Questions from the council. Anything? Nobody. Great presentation, Dale. No questions. Well, thank you for all your support.

Thank you. Okay, let's move on then to Oh, wait a minute. We're going to make a motion to accept this. I'm I'm I'll be I'll be the I'll get to the meeting here soon. Mr. Rodriguez. Uh thank you, Mayor. I move to approve the street and highway and local cooperative agreement AC6180 with the regional transportation commission of county for fiscal year 27 programs and projects. Mr. Anderson, second the motion. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. I

motion carries unanimously. Okay, let's move on. Thank you, Dale. Thank you. 9.6 Consideration discussion of possible action on a request to sponsor an amendment to the 2024 Treky Meadows Regional Plan to establish new regional utility site, establish a new regional utility quarter, and remove existing regional utility quarter. Mr. Kerry.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. For the record, Scott Kerry, development services manager. Um, today for the council's consideration, is a uh consideration of a sponsorship for a regional plan amendment for the Lazy 5 project that Envy Energy is working on. In uh January, the planning commission approved um a conditional use permit for this project. Included in that project was a new electrical substation located near the intersection of Pyramid and Highland Ranch Parkway as well as 8.35 miles of associated 120 KV transmission lines as part of that conditional approval conditional use permit that was approved. There was a condition that said this project needs to be held in conformance with the regional plan. So that's why we're here today seeking your support of a sponsorship for a regional plan amendment. Just for uh further awareness, here's a site plan kind of showing the location of the electrical substation at Highland Ranch and in Pyramid. This is across the street from the entrance to the Five Bridges development. This would this would roughly be Five Bridges Parkway. And then here is a visual provided by NV Energy kind of showing the location or what these future transmission lines would look like. The top is existing conditions. This is Pyramid Way going north. Um the southern or the the one on the bottom here kind of shows the what the renderings would be looking like. These are big transmission lines up to 30 30 feet tall, 120 kilovolt, which triggers a regional plan um designation. So the reason we're here today is is is exhibit is is is map three in the regional plan. This calls out the location of regional utility sites like substations as well as regional utility corridors like transmission lines. So the yellow and the and the and the red lines on this is is what is what we're here for today. The proposed regional

plan amendment be in conformance with policy PF11 of the regional plan. We would be adding a new substation site there at Pyramid and um Highland Ranch Parkway. We'd be adding a new utility corridor that would run south um and cover the new area. And we'd also be removing um an existing line. This u exhibit shows it a little bit better. Um for reference, this is the Walmart. This would be Pyramid Way, Highland Ranch Parkway. This is the location of the utility um substation. The new transmission line would run south along the ridge line and it would get to about here and then it would go south or west and south to the um existing Sullivan substation that's located next to Hug Hug High School and there would be another line that would run um to the east to the existing Spanish Springs substation located next to Wedkin Regional Park. We would be removing as part of this amendment and NV Energy would be removing an existing transmission line that connects the Sullivan and Spanish Springs substation be replaced by this new line that would go across Pyramid Highway. So, we took this to the planning commission last Thursday. Planning commission recommended unanimously um approval of this regional plan amendment. Um at the staff level, we feel that this regional plan amendment would help um advance this project, which is much needed infrastructure for not only the city but but the region. We feel that this uh project would help facilitate and meet the intent of PF policy PF11 of of the regional plan and the planning commission and staff are recommending approval of this sponsorship request that be happy to answer any questions.

Questions from the council? No one? Thank you, Scott. All right, we're looking for a motion. Miss Vanderill move to sponsor an amendment to the 2024 Truckucky Meadows Regional Plan to establish a new regional utility site, establish a new regional utility corridor, and remove an existing regional utility corridor. Mr. Abbott, second. I've got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. I motion carries unanimously. Thank you.

Thanks, Scott. Uh 9.7 consideration discussion of possible approval of a three-year joint agreement AC 6181 for the independent contract services between the city of Sparks, the city of Reno and Technical Medical LLC for phabbotomy services and court testimony in the amount of $782,69951 and the SP city of Spark share being $210,772. $2.56. You're welcome for your pennies. I love the pennies. I love the pennies, especially that's my old football number, 56.

Good afternoon, Mayor Lawson and members of council. For the record, I'm Deputy Chief Tara Edmonson. Uh the agenda item before you is a proposal to renew a joint agreement between the city of Sparks, the city of Reno, and Technical Medical to provide evidentary phabbotomy services to include courtroom testimony. Uh we have been using technical medical for these services since July of 2024 uh when the Wo County Sheriff's Office stopped providing phabbotomy services to agency users of their detention center. uh no cost and fourost alternative options were considered and explored to include the use of local area hospitals uh fire departments and potentially training police officers to complete these necessary evidentary blood draws which help support drug and alcoholrelated criminal investigations, specific sex offenses and certain firearms vi excuse me violations. Uh the last two joint agreements have been a 50-50 split in shared costs between the city of Reno and the city of Sparks. This proposed agreement is for three years of services and the cost sharing uh is now proportionate to agency usage. Uh so this um with this agreement it will save the city almost $60,000 in year one. Um and just for a point of um information, it's a 73 to 27% usage split between the city of Reno and the city of Sparks. Um and this concludes my presentation and I'm available for questions if you have any

questions from the council. We just don't draw as much blood in sparks as much as we can. Interesting. Okay. Well, I'm looking for a motion. Mr. Anderson. I move to approve the three-year joint agreement AC 6181 for independent contract services between the city of Spark, City of Reno, and Technical Medical LLC for flab fl Oh my god. I know. that word services and court testimony in the amount of $782,699.51 and the city of Spark Share being $210,77256.

Mr. Rodriguez second. Second. We got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. I motion carries unanimously. Thank you, Chief. 9.8 consideration discussion of possible approval of the funding allocation of up to $70,950 for FY26 and up to $139,050 for FY27 as recommended by the Tourism and Marketing Committee for 2026 special events. Ready, Julie?

All right. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. I'm Emily Pate, parks and recreation administrative manager, and I have a Pel Monseret, special event supervisor, with me today. We are recommending council approved funding up to $210,000 to event producers that applied for Tormark grants. Event produced by these applicants saw a total of 285,54 event attendees in 2025 with an out ofstate attendee average of 14%. All told, $293,200 was requested with $210,000 available. As the request exceeded the available monies, the Tormark committee, after input from staff regarding attendance figures and outofstate attendees, recommended each producer receive a portion of the requests outlined. That's the end of my presentation, so I'm here for any questions. questions from the council. This is always a fun thing to do uh once a year as we struggle with a small budget and uh big needs.

Fun probably is not the adjective I would use. Mr. Anderson, I don't have a question. I just want to thank you ladies and committee for the work you guys do. I know it's hard to look through all of them and figure out who's going to get divvied up what, but I appreciate the effort you've put into it and and these are the kind of events that make our residents so happy to be a part of the community as well as benefiting the businesses and I I truly appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. Rabbit. Um I don't have any comments. I do have a disclosure to read at the right time. What's that? I have a disclosure to read if we can do that.

Uh I just before voting on item 9.8, 8. I wanted to disclose that I volunteer with the nonprofit 39 North on events and have access to a bank account that's used for our annual kick for a cause kickball fundraiser that benefits kids with diagnosis and their families. I do not receive any personal financial benefit from this volunteer work. Um the money that we are voting on today does not benefit Kicker Cause. After consulting with our city attorney, I have been advised that I do not have any peunerary interest that would require abstension. Uh, he wanted to disclose his relationship for transparency before participating in the vote. That's all I got. You want to throw in phabbotomy, too? They're just made up words here. A Millerite.

Okay, we've got a disclosure. Any other comments? All right, let's I'm looking for a motion. Miss Vanderwell, I move to approve the funding allocation of up to $70,950 for FY26 and up to $139,50 for FY27 as recommended by the Tourism and Marketing Committee for the 2026 special events. Mr. Anderson, I'll second the motion. I've got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. I

motion carries unanimously. Thank you, madame clerk. 9.9, first reading. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is the first reading of bill number 2850 to amend Sparks Municipal Code section 15.05.108.3 regarding refunding of fees paid by applicants for building permit applications. A public hearing will be held in bill 2850 will be acted upon at the regular meeting of the Spark City Council on Monday, March 23rd, 2026 at 2 p.m. Thank you, Madam Clerk. 9.10 of first reading.

Thank you again, Mr. Mayor. This is first reading of bill number 2851, an ordinance amending Sparks Municipal Code, title 13 entitled Water and Sewage, specifically chapter 13.09, sewer, storm, and river flood user charges, and chapter 13.24 24 connection fees to increase sanitary sewer user rates, increase the sanitary sewer connection fees and increase septage rates and providing for other matters properly related there too. A public hearing will be held in bill 2851 will be acted upon at the regular meeting of the Spark City Council on Monday, March 23rd, 2026 at 2 p.m. Madame Clerk, we have a second reading 10.1.

We do, Mr. Mayor. Before I read into the record the second reading, I do want to um notify the council that there was a typo in the publishing of the agenda for the second reading. Um the first reading was published correctly and the substance of the agenda item title is correct in the item. So the bill number is not 2894, it is 2849 and I will correct that when I read it into the record. Okay. So in the um motion we would just need to make that correction. Is that correct, Mr. City Attorney? The motion should be correct already. Okay, perfect.

Um, so this is the second reading public hearing discussion and possible adoption of bill number 2849, an ordinance amending Sparks Municipal Code sections 5.65.020 policy declaration, 5.65.050 applications, investigation, and license issuance, 5.65.10 inspections, and 5.65.110 65.110 operating requirements which is to become effective upon passage by the Spark City Council. We have a presentation, Mr. City Attorney.

We do. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Uh Mr. Mayor, members of the city council, for the record, Wes Duncan, Spark City Attorney, uh here to present bill number 2849 that deals with strengthening some of the provisions uh of our uh code uh for dealing with uh illegal brothel that have been masquerading in our region as massage parlors. Um so you may ask, why are these ordinances in front of you today? the city, you know, has been a leader in this region with shutting down uh these illegal massage parlors. Uh but we wanted to uh ensure that our code is going to continue to uh be able to deter those illegal businesses. I I would note for the record as well um that you know the the scope of these uh illegal massage businesses across the nation, if you can believe it, there's over 15,000 of these uh businesses that operate uh throughout our nation. It's a $5 billion industry. Uh in New York, if you're in New York City, for every Starbucks, there are two illegal massage businesses. In California, for every McDonald's that you see, there are three uh illegal massage businesses. There's approximately 124,000 um illegal uh sex transactions a day. Uh 90% of the women who are explo exploited in these massage businesses come from uh China and Thailand. there's about a 70% undocumented rate and the average uh worker uh carries a debt of around $45,000. Um and you know in a typical illegal massage business or brothel uh these women are being exploited 12 to 16 hours a day, 6 to 7 days a week oftent times while while being uh videoed. And to put it plainly,

uh this is human trafficking that is occurring uh in our region uh for a while within our city. And so we want to make sure that we're doing everything that we can uh to deter these uh activities. So, you know, last uh November um through the efforts of our office uh Christine Barton over in business licensing, Sienna Reed, Jess Stewart, and Chris McMaster in code enforcement. and then the regional human uh trafficking team. Uh we were proud to announce that the city of Sparks had shut down uh all three of the known illegal massage businesses that were occurring uh within the city of Sparks. And so big shout out really um you know these type of efforts take a lot of coordination and our HEAT team is on the front lines every single day attacking uh this type of exploitation human trafficking and then you know you see our great staff uh working you know business licensing code enforcement uh working together to to really shut down uh these terrible terrible practices and exploitation that's occurring uh within our city. So the ordinances that you see in front of you today uh do a number of things. Um and some of them are actually in response to some of the things that we were seeing um not only in these illegal brothel uh but also in response to after we revoked their business license and shut down uh their business. Uh so first if you'll uh look at the ordinance section 5.65H 65H uh 5 through9 which is being added to our code uh ensures that any owner or anyone related uh by a business association or a marriage of someone who had a previously revoked business license will not be able to apply for a license in the future. If you can believe it, one

of the establishments that we shut down uh here in the city of Sparks about a week later, uh the husband came in with the lency whose license had been revoked to try to reapply for another license. Uh so you just the just how brazen uh these business uh they're not businesses, these these uh illegal purveyors of sex exploitation are um is is actually really shocking. And so we want to ensure that our code u makes sure that anybody that was associated uh with a person who had a business license revoked that they cannot get another license. Uh second section 5.65H7 65H7 changes the code so that no massage establishment will be able to be licensed in the same location for 3 years after a business license has been revoked for that location. So we've seen best practices in other cities for example Mesa Arizona had done this. What you'll see is that illegal massage uh people will try to run another illegal brothel in a location that just was closed down. So, this ensures that that there uh that practice will not be allowed and that's for a three-year time period. So, you cannot if you have been revoked in a location, you cannot run uh any type of massage business in that location for a three-year time period. We've seen in other jurisdictions that that has had a deterrence effect on uh other of these illegal brothel trying to come into uh into cities. Third, in section 5.65.100, 65.100. Uh the ordinance is increases the uh the inspection power of both law enforcement and code enforcement and it includes a provision that a business license can be refu revoked, excuse me, if code enforcement or our police are refused uh

when they want to inspect these type of businesses. one location in particular, there were a bunch of locked cupboards and they, you know, wanted to inspect to see what what was going on and they refused that. So, that show that clears up that in our language again and it deters future type of uh of these illegal brothel trying to come into our uh city and masquerade as massage parlors. Um, and finally uh this ordinance adds uh section 5.65110 65110 uh subsections L and M. And it prevents any owner or employee from using the M massage establishment as a living or a sleeping quarters unless they possess a valid home occupant permit. So if you're running a massage a real legitimate massage business out of your home, you're not going to be affected. But what we were seeing in particular one of the massage parlor and we believe all of them uh in our uh jurisdiction uh the women were actually living and working never leaving uh these these places and so that deters uh that type uh of of uh uh behavior and illegal activity uh within our community. So we we actually believe that these um

you know ordinances uh set the standard, set the pace in our region uh for deterring these type of uh illegal uh parlors from from coming back to our jurisdiction. And if they decide that they want to be brazen and try to try to run one of these business within our jurisdiction, uh we'll have the tools uh to be able to to better uh go after them and revoke their businesses if needed. Um, I'll just say, you know, again, want to uh give a give a a hearty thanks to just our regional law enforcement partners, our Sparks, you know, the Sparks Police who do a great job within our community, code enforcement and business licensing who all partnered in on this uh to make Sparks a leader uh uh in this region for for deterring these type of businesses. Uh that concludes my presentation. If you have any questions, happy to happy to answer them. Questions from the council. Okay, seeing none, we have the this is a public hearing. I have one public comment card. Hunter Rand,

Mr. Mayor, Council Hunter, War 2 resident, for the record. Uh, this ordinance is mostly reasonable and frankly needed, but as it's currently written, I believe it places the city of Sparks in legal jeopardy. I am not an attorney. So before coming here today to share information, I consulted with a constitutional law attorney who works in DC. After reviewing the language, he confirmed my concerns. And even if a city ultimately prevails in constitutional litigation, the process itself is costly, and Sparks has already spent significant amounts of money defending and settling lawsuits in recent years. We should be extremely cautious about passing language that could invi invite another one. My primary concerns are section 1, paragraphs 6 and 9. Paragraph 6 allows the city to deny a license if the applicant spouse has had a license revoked. The other categories listed in that section, stockholders, officers, directors, all involve people who have a direct ownership or operational role in the business. A spouse does not necessarily have any role in the business at all. It also does not distinguish whether the revocation occurred 40, 30 years ago or before the marriage even existed or yesterday. We could clear that up. Uh and sometimes a spouse serves in those business roles and in those cases a license should absolutely be denied. Uh courts have recognized that the first amendment protects not only speech but freedom of association and intimate associations like marriage. When government action penalizes someone based on that relationship, it can trigger constitutional scrutiny. And what about fairness? I have heard a member of this council state publicly that they should not be judged based on the actions or associations of their spouse as related to a business. Yet, this ordinance would do exactly that to people seeking a business license in Sparks. Passing this language unchanged would create a clear double standard. And what about the people who represent themselves as married but aren't legally married? My second concern is paragraph 9, which allows a license to be denied to someone who previously worked at a business

where a license was revoked. Employees who may have had no authority, knowledge, or involvement in whatever violation occurred could be p punished. Many employees, receptionists, assistants, technicians simply work at the business. They do not control policies, compliance decisions, licensing matters, or the actions of the owner. See, every single Corwin Ford staff member that worked there, while Richie West was selling drugs out the bank, they all still have their dealer licenses. The goals are legitimate, but regulations must be carefully written so they target the bad actors, not spouses, not unrelated employees, and not people whose only connection is proximity. I strongly encourage the council to revisit the language in subsections 6 and 9 and ensure that this ordinance is both effective and constitutionally sound because if it passes as written, Sparks could find itself defending an expensive constitutional lawsuit. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else in the public wishing to speak on this item? Not, I'll bring it back to the dis and uh questions or comments from the council. All right, then I'm looking for a motion. Mr. Anderson move to adopt bill number 2849, an ordinance amending Sparks Municipal Code sections 565020 policy declaration 5.65.050 applications investigation license in issuance 5.65.01000 inspections and 5.65.11 65.110 operating requirements is presented based on the facts and reasoning in the staff report.

Okay, I got a motion. Mr. Rodriguez, second. Got a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote.

Motion carries unanimously. Thank you, Wes. Uh 11.1 second readom reading. Madame clerk. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is second reading public hearing discussion and possible adoption of bill number 2848, an ordinance amending the Sparks Crossing Final Development Standards Handbook to modify permitted colors and materials for two pad sites, APN's 51008252 and 51008253. generally located east of Pyramid Way, north of Shoppers Way, and south of Los Altos Parkway, Sparks, Nevada, in the NUD New urban district, Sparks Crossing Zoning District. Uh, good afternoon, mayor and council members. For the record, Kobe Gano, planner with the city of Sparks. Uh, before you today, we have a request to amend the Sparks Crossing final development standards handbook to modify permitted colors and materials uh for two pad sites, which are outlined in red on this slide. Uh the Sparks Crossing plan development totals approximately 39 acres and is generally located east of Pyramid uh north of Shoppers Way and south of Los Altos Parkway. Uh city council initially adopted the Sparks Crossing final development standards handbook in June of 2005. Uh the handbook includes site design standards, landscaping requirements, use and operational standards, and architectural standards for the commercial center. The bulk of the shopping center was primarily constructed in 2006 and the northwest corner up here uh was later developed with two commercial buildings in 2019 and 2020. The northernmost pad site which is identified as pad B. Where's my mouse? Right here uh was constructed with a restaurant 2006. According to city business license records, the building was occupied by Chili's uh then Campo and later a Mr. Krab. The

southernmost pad site or pad site 8 has a has not yet been developed and is the last remaining undeveloped parcel within the the shopping center. Um as shown on the screen, staff does believe that the pad sites are functionally disconnected from the rest of the shopping center. Uh for instance, the pad sites lack pedestrian connectivity to the rest of the commercial center as there's no sidewalk connection between those two pad sites and the larger uh anchor buildings on the site. Uh further the existing build building located on pad B is oriented towards Pyramid and away from other buildings within the commercial center. Uh to achieve architectural consistency among the buildings within Sparks Crossing, uh the handbook requires a specific exterior color palette um or color material pallets. The exterior palette identified as exhibit K to the handbook generally requires earth tone colors and materials throughout the development including the two pad sites. Uh the applicant has indicated that the current exterior exterior pallet is restricting the ability of the pad sites to attract various businesses and recognize brands. Uh therefore the applicant is requesting to expand the colors and materials listed in exhibit K uh to allow and include a broader range of universal material materials colors and finishes that would grant the pad sites uh the ability to have a unique character. Uh staff believes that allowing a broader range of colors and materials for the pad site can potentially promote the development of pad A and the redevelopment of pad B. The proposed additional colors and materials can be seen on the second page of exhibit 4. The first page of the exhibit is the original color material board that applies to all of the buildings within the center. And the new exterior pallet for both of the pad sites uh would only be applicable to to those pad sites. They would not apply to the rest of the center. Uh the primary changes would allow flexibility in terms of color scheme with required primary colors consisting consisting of whites, beiges,

tans, grays, browns, reds, oranges, blacks, blues, and teal. Uh these primaries primary colors would be required on at minimum 75% of the exterior of those buildings. Uh accent colors would vary and not be limited to a specific type, but they would not be able to exceed 25% of the exterior of the building. Uh the proposed changes also include additional exterior materials such as brick and tile resembling stone, ceramic, metal or wood. Here are some renderings of what is proposed for the redevelopment of pad site B and an example of how the additional colors of materials could potentially look. Uh with the background and analysis concluded, I'll go ahead and transition over to the 10 required findings. I tried to group them together for uh this presentation. For PDA, PDB, and PDH, uh staff believes that allowing the proposed additional colors and materials for the pad sites within the plan development will incentivize the retention and attraction of tenants for the developed pad site and promote the development, excuse me, for the developed pad site. That was correct. and promote the development of the remaining undeveloped pad site in support of goal CC1 and MG4. Furthermore, staff believes that allowing additional colors materials for the pad sites will not impact the quality of building design that includes uh well articulated building facades and defined entrances for the remodel of the existing building on pad A or for the future development of pad um of pad A, excuse me, in support of policy CC9. The proposed additional colors and materials do not alter the type, location, or size of development uh allowed within the the commercial center. A fiscal uh impact analysis, excuse me, this is for C. Uh fiscal impact analysis was not required with this amendment

because there's no proposed changes to the density requirements for land use. Uh the proposed amendment, if approved, will allow additional colors of materials to be utilized on buildings situated on the pad sites, which staff believes will better provide for the mutual interest of property owners, business owners, and the public. This amendment aims to support the existing commercial center in a manner that staff does believe is consistent with the original intent of the plan. Additionally, staff believes the proposed additional colors and materials for the pad sites will incre will allow for increased economic activity and encourage development of the remaining undeveloped pad site. The new colors materials would be in addition to the exterior uh color material palette currently in the handbook and do not alter the efficient development of the approved uh plan development. The proposed changes will not vary the gross acreage of commercial areas or vary the ratio of residential to non-residential land uses and no um no proposed changes to common open space area where any of the commercial building design standards are proposed. And finally, as proposed, the changes do not benefit any one person and will allow any interested party to pursue development within the Sparks Crossing um the Sparks Crossing commercial center in accordance with the handbook making uh finding PDI. And for finding PDJ, public notice was given as required by NRS and SMC on December 30th, 2025. A total of 234 notices were mailed to all owners within the plan development and within 750 ft of the development boundary as well as published in the Reno Gazette journal. And as of today, staff has received no public comment for this request. Uh staff believes that findings PDA through PDJ can be made and the planning commission recommends that the city council adopt the proposed amendment to the Sparks crossing handbook. And with that, I'm available for any questions as is the

question from the council. Anybody? Okay. Do we have the applicant here? You want do you have anything to add? If you're going to add something, you got to come down here, though. Just uh give us your name for the record, please. Mark and Caroline Platt, owners of Land Ocean. Go ahead.

Uh, yes, we're excited to uh be coming to the area. It's been a longer project than we anticipated. Um, some hoops out there that we uh our architect didn't do a great job of uh clearing like we had hoped and appreciate everybody's time and effort in this. It's really been a uh a long battle, but I think you'll see the restaurant really came out tremendous and uh I think you'll be proud. We're planning on opening next Tuesday as currently our Well, as long as we get approval. Yeah, assuming the vote goes your way. Fingers crossed. Okay. Well, thank you very much. Appreciate your time.

All right. Uh this is a public hearing and anyone in the public wishing to speak on this item? Being none, we'll bring it back to the dis. Any questions from the council? Okay, we are looking for a motion then. Miss Vanderwell. Thank you. I move to adopt bill number 2848 to amend the Sparks Crossing final development standards handbook to not modify permitted colors and materials for two pad sites APN's 510-82-52 and 510-82-53 PCN0307PD25-00001 based on findings PDA through PDJ and the facts supporting those findings as set forth in the staff Mr. Rodriguez,

I'll second. I've got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Motion carries unanimously. Looking forward to uh eating in your establishment. Thank you so much. Um, okay. Let's move on. Comments from the public. Do we have, Madam Clerk, we have any public comments? We do not, Mr. Mayor.

Okay. Uh announcements from the mayor, city council, and city manager. I have an announcement that uh I would like to ask our city manager to look into alternatives to contracting ambulance services for the city of Sparks. The alternatives include a new subcontract standing up our could include a new subcontractor, standing up our own ambulance service, or any combination thereof. reasons to look it at is a lack of response to our questions about the new contract at public health. I believe that this step should have been taken by them. Uh and it wasn't and Sparks was largely ignored in this and this contract doesn't allow Sparks to deploy equipment in the best interests of our community. There you have it, Mr. Rabbit. Um, I just wanted to announce that I I know I'm looking a little shaggy, but we're uh Councilman Anderson, myself, uh, capital projects coordinator or not capital projects coordinator, I don't even know his title. Brandon Baxter, uh, mechanic Andrew Beaver, and I think that's I think that's everyone. Well, everyone from City Sparks, we have J.R. and Shane. Uh, are doing St. Baldicks on Friday, so we'll be shaving our heads for uh, for children's cancer. So, I haven't cut it my hair in, I think, 3 months or so. getting a little long, but uh we're doing it for a good cause. Um and we uh we didn't have to compete Rena this year. They only had one person compete, so you know, we are we already won there. But uh but really the kiddos are the big winners and it's a great time. If you guys wanted to come out, uh it's at the uh the Reno Convent Center. Yeah. Right downtown. So on Friday,

we have the bulk of the participants. Why isn't it in Sparks? That's right, man. We're trying to change that, you know, always trying to change it or we work on that, please. Can I get a motion for that? A second. So, yeah, just it's a great time. We're I think we raised around $13,400 so far for the community. Um, and we always we've done it the last couple years, so we have a good time. Okay. Mr. Anderson,

just want to say for those of you that aren't familiar with St. Paul's, it's uh to fund children's cancer research. And if you get to meet some of the young children that instead of being able to enjoy their their young life um have literally been fighting life or death and so we would truly appreciate not just supporting the kids but supporting the city of Sparks, those of us that are going to trim trim our hair a little bit. So we would appreciate your support. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Manager, you have anything?

Yeah, thank you, mayor. I just want to say thanks to all of our team that was associated with the presentation this morning on the CIP. A lot of time, effort, energy goes into that so we can take our limited resources and make them the most effective. So kudos to all that were a part of that. Appreciate it. And uh with that, I'll turn it back to you, Miss Bbeby. Do you have anything to add? I do not. Thank you. Okay. Well, with that, we're up to my lucky 13. We're adjourned.