City Council - Regular Meeting

All right, let's call to order the Spark City Council meeting for June 8th with a roll call.

Mayor Lawson.

Here.

Council members Abbott.

Here.

Vanderwell. Here. Anderson. Here. Bybee. Here. Rodriguez. Here. City attorney Duncan. Here. City manager Lawson.

Here.

We do have a quorum. Thank you.

Okay. We have an invocation speaker, Pastor Jordan McDermott from the Crosswinds Assembly of God.

Thank you for allowing me to pray today. Let's bow our heads. Heavenly Father, we thank you for the opportunity to gather today and that we live in a free nation and in a free city, one nation under God. And so we thank you for this privilege of enjoying freedom today, Lord. And your word says that if anyone lacks wisdom, let them ask of God who gives willingly and without finding fault, and it will be given. I ask for wisdom today upon this meeting, every decision that's made, that we would not be wise in our own eyes, but that we would seek the wisdom from above. And I know that the Bible says this, trust in the Lord with all your heart, lean not on your own understanding. In all your ways, acknowledge him and he will make your paths straight. So Lord, may there be a straight path ahead of us today and bless this city council meeting in the name of Jesus. Amen.

Mr. Rodriguez, will you lead us in your pledge? Please join me.

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. Thanks.

All right, let's move on to public comment. I'm gonna start with Walt Rosenberg.

It's on? Oh, thank you. Mayor Lawson, city council members, city clerks, city attorney. The only question, I have a question and it's, what is the city doing with regards to data centers?

It's a public comment, public discourse. So I can have Mr. Rundle, is he in the room yet? Yes. He can talk to you, Walt.

Okay, I'll wait until he comes up. Or is he coming up?

No, he's not going to come up, but he can meet you in the hallway and tell you what's going on.

Okay, I'll talk to him out in the hallway. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you very much for what you folks are doing for the City of Sparks.

Thank you, Walt. Thank you. You're welcome. Catherine Pugh.

Good afternoon, my name is Catherine Pugh and I reside in the city of Sparks for over 50 years now. My husband Leonard has lived here his entire life. Our Wingfield story began in 1997 as we began to become captivated by advertisements. A masterful golf community planned by nature. In addition, there was a promise of quality control. The value of a home and or lot at Wingfield Springs will be preserved and encouraged to appreciate through a three-tiered quality control program. And there were still more enticements. Founders Club privileges. Well, that sounded good to us because it was a special program that was reserved for the first purchasers of custom home sites at Wingfield Springs. 23 rounds of golf per lot per year for life. And we weren't even that old yet. If you build it, we will come. And so we did. You see, over our 49 years of marriage, we've really watched Sparks grow. We started our married life not far from here on 716 H Street and Pyramid Way, catty corner from Sparks Florist. Then five years later in 1982, we moved to a quieter location at the edge of town. Our home backed up to Vista and my kitchen window looked out at the cows across Vista on the D'Andrea Ranch. As sparks evolved and the D'Andrea Ranch developed, we moved in 1990 just south about three blocks, but definitely off of Vista, which by now was a real boulevard. So living on Jitney Drive in a matter of about five years, we watched the small cow pasture immediately behind our home transform into a housing development and a middle school. Things change, it's just a way of life. But now we long to find a way of life that could promise more open spaces and a development with a plan. We would be empty nesters soon after raising three sons and retiring from lives spent working with children. Myself as a teacher and my husband in juvenile services. We wanted to purchase a home that warranted an established plan. No more home purchases only to find more traffic, new homes and a middle school in our backyard. In Wingfield Springs, we saw not just a plan, but an established master plan. They built it, they packaged it, and we live here today because we trusted it. In closing, I would just like to say thank you to all of you for the jobs you do. Thank you.

Thank you, Catherine. All right, Anna Sovala.

Good afternoon. My name is Anna Sabala. I am part of the 2026 Marino-Sparks Chamber Leadership class. And actually, I just came to introduce myself and then say thank you to Mayor Lawson for coming and attending one of our classes a couple weeks ago.

Thank you. Always my favorite thing to see our future leaders in that class. Okay, anyone else in the public wishing to speak at this time? Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the dais. Let's move on to approval of the agenda. Any additions, corrections? If not, let me know. Mr. Rodriguez. I move to approve the agenda as submitted. Mr. Abbott. Second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Motion carries unanimously. Approval of the minutes. Any additions, subtractions for the approval of the minutes? If not, I'm looking for a motion. Ms. Vanderwell.

I move to approve the minutes of the regular Spark City Council meeting for May 26th, 2026.

Ms. Bybee.

I'll second that motion.

We got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Motion carries unanimously. Number seven, announcements, presentation, recognition items, and items of special interest. Mr. Manager, or Ms. Madam Clerk, boards and commissions vacancy announcement, Spark Civil Service Commission.

Thank you, Mayor. There are two vacancies on the Sparks Civil Service Commission, each for a three-year term. Members must be Sparks residents. Members cannot be city employees. A member of the city council are appointed to another board or commission of the city or related to one within the third degree of consanguinity. Applications will be accepted until June 10th, 2026 at 5 p.m. Persons interested in serving on any board or commission should complete a community services application online at the city's website, www.cityofsparks.us forward slash get involved. Simply complete the volunteer application form and click submit. Thank you.

Thank you. 7.2, proclamation for Juneteenth. Do we have anyone here for that? Come on down. We'll... read the proclamation, and then we'll have you say a few words. And Diane, you have that one?

I do.

Okay.

Thank you. Whereas Juneteenth, also known as Freedom Day and Emancipation Day, marks June 19th, 1865, when Union soldiers brought word to Galveston, Texas, that the Civil War had ended and all enslaved people were free over two years after the Emancipation Proclamation. And whereas for 36 years, the Northern Nevada Black Cultural Awareness Society, NIPCAS, has led our region's Juneteenth celebration promoting education, unity, and appreciation for African history and culture. And whereas this annual event offers our community a time to reflect on the progress made, honor the contributions of African Americans, and recommit to the pursuit of freedom, justice, and equality for all. And whereas the Juneteenth celebration features music, art, learning, and fellowship, reminding us of the resilience and richness of African American culture. Now, therefore, I, Ed Lawson, Mayor of the City of Sparks, do hereby proclaim June 19th, 2026 as Juneteenth Celebration Day in the City of Sparks and encourage all citizens to participate in this important event and join in building a more inclusive and united future.

Okay. Give us your name for the record and go ahead and say a few words if you'd like.

Yeah, Alex White, the third president of Northern Nevada Black Cultural Awareness Society. I'm honored to accept this on behalf of the community and thank you. Fun fact, it's actually our 38th annual celebration. But again, truly humbled and thank you for this. This is true progress. And as I said in the media this morning, you know, Juneteenth is not black history or just black history. It's American history. And I think this really demonstrates us moving forward. So thank you.

Okay, thank you. We're gonna now have you take a picture with Councilwoman Vanderwill for the millions of YouTube viewers we have. All right, we're gonna move on to 7.3, Scoliosis Awareness Month. Mr. Abbott, we gave you the proclamation with the large words in it. I heard a joke and I wasn't able to respond. And it's long.

Yeah, it's always the medical ones. Thank you so much, it's an honor. So I don't see Kyle's, I'm not sure if it, yeah, interesting. So, okay. Whereas scoliosis is a medical condition characterized by an abnormal curvature of the spine affecting between two and 3% of the population for an estimated 7 million people in the United States. And whereas scoliosis is a condition that can develop in individuals of any gender, race, age, or economic status, often without a known cause. And whereas an estimated 1 million scoliosis patients seek healthcare annually, and approximately one in each six children diagnosed with this condition may require active medical intervention to prevent further progression. And whereas the primary age of onset for scoliosis is between 10 and 15 years old, with females being five times more likely than males to develop a curve magnitude that necessitates treatment. And whereas untreated scoliosis can lead to a physical discomfort, reduced mobility, and in severe cases, impact lung and heart function, underscoring the importance of early detection and intervention. And whereas scoliosis screening programs provide critical opportunities for early diagnosis and treatment, which can minimize the need for invasive procedures and improve quality of life. And whereas scoliosis awareness month serves as a vital reminder to educate communities about the importance of routine screening, available treatment options and support resources for individuals and families affected by scoliosis. Now, therefore, on behalf of Ed Lawson, the Mayor of the City of Sparks, to hereby proclaim June, 2026 as Scoliosis Awareness Month and encourage all residents to learn about scoliosis, recognize its signs, support awareness initiatives, and advocate for early detection and treatment to ensure the wellbeing of our community.

Okay, let's move on to consent items. Anyone wishing to pull a consent item? If not, I'm looking for a motion.

Mr. Anderson. Move to approve consent items 8.1 through 8.6 as submitted. Mr. Abbott.

Second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Motion carries unanimously. 9.1, general business consideration discussion of possible approval of the mayor's appointments to the Sparks Parks and Recreation Commission from the following pool of applicants listed in alphabetical order. Myrna DeLera-Lopez. Terry Fregoli, Cody Martin, Gabrielle McGregor, and Jill Short. I've asked to appoint Terry Fregoli, Gabrielle McGregor, and Jill Short. Any discussion? If not, I am looking for a motion.

Mr. Abbott. I move to appoint Jill Short, Terry Frugoli, and Gabrielle McGregor to the Sparks Parks and Recreation Commission, each with terms ending June 30th, 2029.

Mr. Rodriguez. I'll second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Motion carries unanimously. All right, 9.2, consideration discussion of possible award of a bid number 25-26-010 for chemical supply and delivery contract AC6203 to Pioneer America's LLC to supply sodium hydrochlorate to the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility for an estimated first year annual cost $3,017,000 with Spark's share being $1,146,460. Casey.

Good afternoon, Mayor Lawson and members of council. For the record, Casey Mentzer, Treatment Plant Director at the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility. So this item before you is the result of a recent public bid where we're looking to get Pioneer Americas under contract for the supply of sodium hypochlorite, also known as bleach. Bleach is a necessary chemical for Tumor where we use it to disinfect the wastewater of pathogens such as bacteria and viruses. Disinfection is required to meet both Tumworth's surface water discharge and effluent reuse permit requirements. This year has been particularly challenging with regards to bleach prices and our existing supplier. We have seen dramatic cost escalations over the course of this fiscal year. Our current supplier used to manufacture bleach, but no longer does so in our region. So they're effectively just a chemical distributor to Tomwharf. And it's made them a lot more susceptible to market variability. In an attempt to get more competitive pricing, staff held a public bid for this particular chemical. We received three bids with Pioneer Americas being the lowest responsive bidder at $4.31 a gallon. Just by a point of comparison, our existing supplier bid $5.05 a gallon. On an annual basis, the difference between Pioneer Americas and our current supplier is $500,000. Telmorph regularly receives bleach already manufactured by Pioneer Americas through our current vendor. And so this agreement is effectively us going straight to the source, going to the chemical manufacturer themselves rather than using a chemical distributor. This is a one-year fixed term with up to nine mutually agreeable extensions. It does enable the city manager to approve certain unit cost increases during term extensions of less than 10%, as well as intra-term adjustments due to market volatility, so long as they're consistent with a particular price index associated with chemicals of this nature. I just really want to recognize the collaboration between the city attorney's office with Mr. Brandon Sendahl and the community services department with Mr. Brian Kaysen. They were tremendously helpful and, you know, helped us get this bid across the finish line. With that, staff recommend award and I'd be happy to answer any questions. All right. Questions from the council.

Ms. Pipey.

Casey, thank you so much for pursuing. I know the chemical costs have just been skyrocketing more than most other things we have to pay for. And obviously, you can't run the plant without the chemicals. So really appreciate the work the whole team did to find another bid. And really getting rid of the middleman makes a whole lot of sense. And I think that probably was the difference in the cost. And I can't thank you enough. $500,000 is a lot. And then for extension, year by year, just makes a lot of sense. So thank you, job well done. Thank you.

Okay, anyone else? Okay, if there's no other questions, I'm looking for a motion. Ms. Spivey.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I move to approve bid number 25-26-010 for a chemical supply and delivery contract AC6203 to Pioneer America's LLC to supply sodium hypochlorite to the Truckee Meadow Water Reclamation Facility for an estimated first year annual cost of $3,017,000 with SPARC's share being approximately $1,146,460.

Mr. Rodriguez. I'll second. We've got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. I think it did. Yes. Okay. All right. 9.3, consideration discussion of possible adoption of a joint resolution number 3488 between the City of Reno, City of Spark, Washoe County, and the Housing Authority of the City of Reno of intent to participate in the governance of Housing Authority of City of Reno as a regional housing entity operating in and for the benefit of County of Washoe State of Nevada. in furtherance of Assembly Bill 103 enacted in the 83rd session of the Nevada legislature. Did you write that? No. Amy, you're up.

Good afternoon, Mayor Lawson, members of council. My name is Amy Jones, housing specialist. I am before you today recommending approval of the joint resolution between the City of Sparks, City of Reno, Washoe County, and the Reno Housing Authority regarding the city's intent to participate in the governance of the Reno Housing Authority as a regional housing authority, thereby creating the Truckee Meadows Housing Authority. The Reno Housing Authority is governed by NRS Chapter 315. During the 83rd session of the Nevada Legislature, Assembly Bill 103 was enacted and amended Chapter 315, authorizing the creation of a regional housing authority in a county whose population is over 100,000 but less than 700,000, which is applicable to Washoe County. The Reno Housing Authority was initially created by the City of Reno in 1943 and is governed by a five-member board. The board members are appointed by the Mayor of Reno in concurrence with the Reno City Council. Washoe County and the City of Sparks, by resolution, also recognize the need for a housing authority and authorized the RHA to operate within their respective jurisdictions. The RHA's programs and affordable housing properties do benefit the City of Reno, City of Sparks, and Washoe County. Additionally, upon creation of a regional housing authority, AB 103 revises the structure of the Housing Authority Board of Commissioners from a five-member board to a seven-member board. To create a regional housing authority under AB 103, The governing bodies of the City of Sparks, City of Reno, and Washoe County shall adopt a resolution identifying the following, the intent to regionalize some or all of their powers, a reference to the development plan for transitioning any existing authority to a regional authority, the geographic scope of the regional authority, and such other matters as the governing body is determined to be necessary or advisable. The three jurisdictions are in agreement that this is in the best interest for the region to create a regional housing authority. And through their respective city managers and legal counsel, they collectively drafted the joint resolution before you today. AB 103 stipulates that upon the adoption of the resolution by the governing bodies creating a regional housing authority, the existing housing authority must be dissolved. This raised concerns for the housing authority due to their designation as a moving to work agency. MTW status allows the RHA administrative and programming flexibilities to best meet local needs. The Housing Authority was informed by HUD that should the Housing Authority be dissolved, it would result in the Housing Authority losing that move into work status. And losing that status would be detrimental to the housing authority's current clients as well as to Washoe County. So it was discussed among the three jurisdictions and the RHA that the language of dissolution of the housing authority would need to be revised in the next Nevada legislative session. However, the creation of a regional housing authority could proceed pursuant to AB 103 along with the creation and appointment of a seven-member board. Upon the creation of the Housing Authority in 1943, a five-member Board of Commissioners was established to provide governance of the RHA operations. HUD does require one member of the Board of Commissioners to be a participant in one of the programs administered by the Housing Authority. The board members are appointed by the mayor of Reno in concurrence with the Reno City Council. Historically, one or two members of the Reno Council have served on that board, and the remaining members are selected from the general public. AB 103 revises the composition of the board of commissioners to include seven members to be appointed as follows. Two persons appointed by the governing body of Washoe County, two persons appointed by the governing body of the city of Reno, two persons appointed by the governing body of the city of Sparks, and one person who is a current participant of a program within the Reno or the housing authority appointed by the executive director. Some of the key provisions of the joint resolution between the City of Reno, City of Sparks, Washoe County, and the RHA contain the following. Section one creates the Truckee Meadows Housing Authority, and RHA will file a certification with the Secretary of State as doing business as the Truckee Meadows Housing Authority. Section 2, upon adoption of the joint resolution and in accordance with the spirit of AB 103, the Spark City Council will appoint two members to serve on the new Truckee Meadows Housing Authority Board of Commissioners. Section 3 details the term limits. Upon initial appointment, each jurisdiction shall appoint one member for a two-year term, one member for a three-year term. to allow for staggered terms and subsequent members will be appointed by the councils and the commissions must be appointed for a term of four years and there is a maximum of three total terms. Section four addresses the appointment and term of the program participant. This again will be appointed by the executive director and must be a participant of a program administered by the newly Truckee Meadows Housing Authority. The appointee must be appointed for a term of four years and can serve a maximum of two terms. Section six, the City of Reno shall reappoint two of its existing RHA Board of Commissioners, one of which is the Chair of the Board. Section eight, the current Chair of the Board of Commissioners will retain that position until the new next Board of Commissioners election in December of 2027. Section nine addresses the voluntary resignation of the current board members. Upon appointment of new commissioners by each appointing authority, the currently appointed commissioner shall voluntarily resign and the new board of commissioners shall be seated at the next regularly scheduled RHA slash Truckee Meadows Housing Authority board meeting. And section 11 does address the dissolution of the RHA and Again, as mentioned before, the RHA shall not dissolve as specified in AB 103. Rather, all parties agree to work cooperatively in the next session of the Nevada legislature to remove the dissolution requirement to avoid compromising RHA's moving to work status. So next steps. The Reno City Council adopted the resolution on June 3rd. The Washoe County Board of Commissioners will be voting on the adoption at the June 16th meeting. Should all three jurisdictions adopt the joint resolution, the Reno Housing Authority Board of Commissioners will vote on adoption at their June 23rd meeting. Upon adoption of the joint resolution, each of the governing bodies for the City of Sparks, City of Reno, and Washoe County will appoint two members to serve on the newly created Truckee Meadows Housing Authority at a subsequent city council or county commission meeting. And this could tentatively happen in July. And finally, The newly appointed members will be seated at the next scheduled meeting of the Truckee Meadows Housing Authority. Based on this tentative timeline, that could be August. I recommend a motion is listed on the slide. That concludes my presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions.

Questions from the council? All I can say, this is about time. Sparks gets a say so in this. They do great work at Reno Housing Authority. Don't get me wrong. But it's about time that Sparks was on that board also since a good percentage of their work is done here in Sparks. So thank you. Do you have anything you want to add? Okay. All right. All right. So with that, then I'm looking for a motion.

Ms. VanderWaal. I'm happy to make this motion. I do want to thank staff and RHA and everybody else for making this and also Assemblywoman Natha Anderson for carrying it. So I move to approve the adoption of the joint resolution number 3488 between the City of Reno, City of Sparks, Washoe County, and the Housing Authority. of the City of Reno regarding the city's intent to participate in the governance of the Housing Authority of the City of Reno as a regional housing entity to continue to operate in and for the benefit of Washoe County in compliance with AB 103-2025. Mr. Rodriguez.

I'm happy to second. I've got a motion and a second. Any further discussions? Seeing none, please vote. Motion carries unanimously. Thanks, Amy. Madam Clerk, 10.1, a public hearing.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is the second reading public hearing discussion and possible action of bill number 2856, an ordinance amending chapter 12.44 of the Sparks Municipal Code to approve the Regional Transportation Commission's regional road impact fee, eighth edition land use assumptions, proposed capital improvements plan, associated fees, and the updates to the general administrative manual and providing for other matters properly related thereto.

Mr. Rundle. Mr. Mayor, Jim Rundle, Community Services Director. We have our colleagues here, Mr. Wilbrick from RTC. This is an item that goes to all the three jurisdictions of Sparks, Washoe County, and Reno on how we approach regional road impact fees. Here we are on the eighth edition. So Mr. Wilbrick will give a presentation on how this works. It's an ordinance. So we're asking for the council's support on this. Your staff does recommend approval on this, Mayor.

Okay.

Do you know how to pull that up?

No, I have no idea. Julie, could you come? Do you want the PDF?

All right. Good afternoon, Mayor Lawson and city fellow council members. My name is Jeff Lebrecht. I work with RTC Engineering. I'm here to give a quick update on our eighth edition update of the regional road impact program. So a quick overview of what the regional road impact fee program is essentially, it's a funding tool that collects funds for when new development comes online and we need to address the added demand that those improvements create on our regional road network. So we use those collected monies to create regional road capacity improvements to our community. The program itself has several advantages as well as a couple limitations. Really, in essence, it's identified as a funding mechanism that allows development to pay its fair share. It's a tool that's been in our community for quite some time, and it's kind of viewed by the community as an equitable system to collect those funds to pay for roadway improvement projects. Some of the limitations of the funds themselves is they cannot be used for operating costs, they can't be used for maintenance, and they can't be used for non-capacity-related road improvements, such as trees and things like that. The program has kind of a hierarchy of oversight, starting with NRS 278B gives the program guidance through the Nevada state law. Your local government, as well as the city of Reno, Sparks, and Washoe County have enacted ordinances. That's what we're here today to update. that allow the inaction of the impact fee program. And then as a collective between Reno, Sparks, Washoe County and RTC, we've entered into an interlocal cooperative agreement that identifies kind of the roles, responsibilities of operating the program. At the program level, there's two main documents that we use to kind of administer the program. First is the general administrative manual. That's kind of our guidelines of how we as staff operate the program, as well as the community members who then use, you know, pay fees and understand how that fee structure works. And then the capital improvement plan. That's the backbone of how we understand the improvements that are needed in our community and then what the costs of those improvements are. So why we're here today is really to update the program. Through that ICA, it identifies RTC as the responsible party for initiating that update. We do that immediately after the RTP is updated. So that's the regional transportation plan. And that's the kind of backbone planning document that we use through the inaction of the RIF program. So it kind of has the planning backbone to it. Also in the RTP is the list of capital improvements that are attributable to new development. So there's a lot of planning work that goes into the RTP that kind of helps get us along to understand what is needed to help facilitate new development in our community. And then again, at the program level, we have a technical advisory committee, and that includes members of your staff, Reno, Sparks, Washoe County, as well as members of the private community to kind of represent and understand how does the program work? What do we need to work on? Where's any kind of shortcomings or gaps that we need to address to make the program work well for staff, communities, and well as the private community? This is a kind of a flowchart that helps identify how the program and the fee structure is calculated and understood. And really what I want to take away from this is kind of the different colors of the flowchart. So red is the TMRPA. We're using a lot of their information to kind of understand how the community is growing, what's going on there. And the green is RTC planning's work through the RTP and the travel demand model. From that, we understand what that long-range plan is and then the growth that's kind of coming in to our area. And then the blue is our RRIF TAC and the RRIF program level work where we're looking at a 10-year horizon. We're understanding the costs associated with that, the improvements that are needed in that 10-year horizon. And we ultimately get to what would be a fee schedule based on different land uses, so a house versus a restaurant or a warehouse. So I have a couple slides here to kind of talk about that flowchart. And the first one is what TMRPA does. So TMRPA is a predictive model or a predictive growth model that looks at how is new development coming on in our community. They look at the consensus forecast. They look at kind of what's in tentative map, what's in final map. They... start to understand what does the future have and kind of what is the timeline of when these properties or development is going to come online to really get a count or a quantify what are the new number of houses and the future employment that our region has the potential for. So once we start to understand that growth, we need to start kind of looking at, like, how do we measure that growth in the transportation world, right? So I'm an engineer. I love acronyms and numbers. So we want to get it to a service unit that we can understand and measure where growth is occurring and how it's occurring. So for the RIF program, we use a metric called VMT, which is vehicle miles traveled. That's kind of an aggregate number that identifies the number of vehicles on our roadway network and then the distance they're traveling. So it's kind of an aggregate number that represents those two things. So we use that as the measured unit in our RIF program. And then to kind of further that, we have a travel demand model that looks at that growth model, kind of looking at the VMTs that are occurring on our network. Remember the number of trips and the length of the trips. And we separate our region into lots of TAZs, which is traffic analysis zones. So those are kind of like zones that all connect to major kind of collector roads. And we measure the number of trips and the length of the trips from one TAZ to another TAZ. And we aggregate that into a gigantic model to understand what is the current capacity of our network? How much of our network is being used? And then when development comes online, how much of that capacity, that excess that we have, is being consumed by development? And how much more do we need to then meet that added demand? So that travel demand model goes into our regional transportation plan, and that's again where we have our 10-year look of what are the improvements that are needed to facilitate that added growth from the travel demand model. NRS also requires that we have specific zones that we're looking at growth in. So for our area, we have two service areas, a north and a south, and that's separated by Interstate 80. So through all that planning, Team RPA, all that work, we get to this kind of simplified chart where we're understanding what is the total cost of the RIF share, what's the triple D new development and total cost, how that's separated between the two service areas, north and south, and then what is the VMT growth by service area to ultimately get to a dollar per VMT per service area. And then this is a very complex, busy slide, so I won't go through all of it. But really what I wanted to kind of highlight here is the difference. This is a graphic that shows how we take that VMT, the total cost of the capital improvement, and then attribute those to different land uses. So an easy one to look at is a single family house. Currently, we're in seventh edition, year four indexing, which is kind of on the right side of the screen. And we're transitioning to the eighth edition. And really the cost difference there is it's a slight decrease in what the impact fee for a new home would be. A couple of them are increasing, a couple are decreasing. And really the change that we're seeing here is every year or every couple of years, we're New guidelines are published. And for this program, we use a lot of information from the ITE, which is the Institute of Traffic Engineers, to understand how new developments are growing, how many trips are being generated out of like a McDonald's or a Starbucks. And we apply those new fresh rates to the different land uses. And that's really what we're seeing in terms of the changes here. So kind of a quick summary of differences between the 7th edition that we're currently operating under and the proposed 8th edition. For the CIP program, we're seeing a roughly 2.5% on average decrease in fees, but we are seeing a higher cost and capital for our improvements. And we're seeing a slight decrease in VMTs over the 10-year planning horizon. Our RTC planning group did an updated household study to understand how people are taking trips. And that's really what has caused that last kind of final bullet point in the decrease of trips. On the general administrative manual, that guidance document that staff uses to kind of administer the program, we did update a couple things to just clarify it, make sure our organization responsibilities were clear, just kind of a cleanup process. And then we aligned land uses with local ordinances. So I know data centers and logistics centers have kind of been a hot topic lately. We wanted to make sure that we were specifically calling those out so that they're being captured appropriately and correctly in the program. And then we aligned just terminology, again, just to make all these related documents talk nicely to each other. So we made those kind of updates. The last thing to kind of quickly highlight is the business impact statement. So recently through the last legislative session, Assembly Bill 444 required that a business impact statement be prepared for any kind of changes to business impact fee programs. So we did conduct that this past year. And a couple of findings out of that business impact statement was that the eighth edition is not expected to impose a direct or significant economic burden on businesses. And the second finding is that while some business types have some increases, others have slight decreases to the proposed fee schedule. The next steps for the overall adoption process is actually I've gone to your planning commission. I've gone to the planning commissions of Washoe County and Reno as well. I've also gone to their city council meetings. And so this meeting is actually my last meeting until we are able to adopt the program. And then we'll give a 30-day notice before these new fees are imposed, which is expected in July of 2026. And with that, I just wanna say thank you to you all for letting me speak. And then a big thank you to your staff. This is a regional program that really requires everybody to work together. So thanks to Amber, Sienna, and Jim for facilitating all this work.

Thanks, Jeff. Any questions from the council?

Just curious, as you looked at determining what the new fees are and that it's 2.5% decrease, VMTs are down, so that's part of your factor, I would guess. But your CIP costs are higher. So where does the funding come if this is lower? How do you cover those CIP costs? Where's the money coming from?

Yeah, so this is kind of separate. So the RTP program is looking at, it's a fiscally constrained planning document. And we're looking at all available funding sources, fuel tax, federal funds, formula federal funds, discretionary federal funds. And the thing about RIF is it only gets triggered when development occurs. And so if no development is occurring, there's no fees that are being collected and there's no improvements that are needed. So it's kind of a, you know, it's what's the difference is what this is intended to cover between after all those other fees or all those other funding sources are spent.

Jeff, don't you get an impact fee if you alter your business, make it bigger?

Yep. So that's a change of use. If you make a change to your business, you're going to pay a new RIP fee. Correct. If you were to take a single family house and turn it into like an old folks home, you're changing the use of that. You're causing new trips into the network.

Thanks, Mayor. Jim Rundle, Community Services Director. And I think the term before there is an intensification. So if you come in to a warehouse and you choose to turn it to vehicle sales, RV sales, the intensification goes up and you will pay an additional RTC regional road impact. And that is the same thing across the entire region, Sparks, Reno, or unincorporated Washoe County. Ms. VanderWaal.

Just a really quick question. When you're looking at for averages for VMTs, are you looking in the past or are you forecasting forward? It's a forecast forward. Is it? Okay. Then I answered my question. Perfect. Thank you. Mr. Rodriguez.

Thank you, Ms. Meredith. So that was two out of my three questions. So my last one, it's kind of like that ripple effect. So especially I got a reminder, Councilwoman Bybee's board is seeing a lot of growth. um now i guess kind of like piggybacking off those two questions so like for the costco for instance in sparks you know uh sure maybe development has to you know build a new turn lane or something like that but now we're looking at those businesses down the road is rtc looking at any of that or those roads because i'll be honest that road along costco might work 10 years ago but now it's

pretty hairy so yeah so i think there's you know probably layers to the question there's layers to the answer in the sense that the rift program is really um there's a whole separate part of planning that's going on that's looking at all those types of things of um where do we think growth is occurring how do we plan improvements we don't Our community doesn't plan forward necessarily improvements. We want to do the improvement at the right time. So through all the other work that RTC planning is doing of identifying where capacity is needed, we're trying to plan that out. Like Sparks Boulevard is kind of a good example where Sparks Boulevard, we planned it so that the capacity was going to get to its peak, and then we're going to build and allow it to continue to grow. A lot of our work kind of follows that process. Does that answer your question?

Council Member Rodriguez, if I can add on to that. What was your name, Jim? Still the same, Mayor. Same item, right?

Yeah, but not in mud.

You spell it with a M-U-D-D? Jim Rondeale, Community Services. Rondeale. Council Member Rodriguez, the TAZs that Mr. Wilbert talked about earlier in the presentation are looking out into the future development in SPARCS. The consensus forecast that regional planning develops is looking at employment, looking at commercial, and looking at additional residential units and how many trips that will provide for into the future. So when we look at collaboratively RTC, your SPARC staff, and we're looking at those intensifications of greenfield development or potentially even adaptive reuses of development, what we look at is when something comes in of a certain size, they might put in additional infrastructure. to accommodate for those future uses you're talking about. When they do that through the regional impact fee, they can receive waivers. And so that project of record may over build what they need as a development, but then they don't come in if they're building permit and pay for an RTC impact fee. They actually get waivers because they put on additional infrastructure from what they should have to put in.

Awesome. All right.

Thank you. Thanks. Anyone else? All right, with that then, this is a public hearing. So let's open it up to the public. Anyone in the public wishing to speak on this item? If none, I'll bring it back to the dais. And we are looking for a motion.

Mr. Anderson. I move to approve bill number 2856 and ordinance amending chapter 12.44 of the Sparks Municipal Code to approve the Regional Transportation Commission's regional road impact fee eighth edition land use assumptions proposed capital improvements plan associated fees and updates to the general administrative manual and providing for other matters properly related thereto.

Ms. VanderWaal? Second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. 10.2, public hearing, Madam Clerk.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is public hearing consideration and possible approval of an agreement for professional legal services with Whitmore Law PLLC AC6201 on an as needed basis as determined by the city manager and city attorney within the city manager's budget authority for the remainder of fiscal year 26 and fiscal year 27.

Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor and city council members. For the record, I'm Allison McCormick, your assistant city manager. Today, I am seeking your approval, as Madam Clerk mentioned, of a professional legal services agreement with Whitmire Law. The hourly rate, as stated in the agreement, is $400 an hour, which is a discount from their private sector rates. This does require a public hearing under our charter. With that, I am happy to answer any questions.

Questions from the council. Yes, Mr. Rodriguez.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess, like, what's the cap on this that we're looking at? I saw that it was like $400 an hour, and that's, dare I say, fair. But to how much?

Up to the city manager's budget authority. So we budget annually a certain dollar figure for outside legal expenses, and it would be up to that.

To distract the public, what is that?

I believe it's $350,000 for this fiscal year. That is for all outside legal, however, and we do have other agreements with other law firms to provide services in other areas. So that's a cumulative total.

Thank you. It's important to know that money is just not sitting somewhere. Anyone else? Okay. Oh, Ms. VanderWaal.

I just have a really quick question. So what Whitmer Law does, do we not have an agency up here in the north that does it?

Whitmer Law came highly recommended by one of the other firms that we work with in Southern Nevada. That's Marquis Auerbach. They specialize in some employment matters and handle some of those for us. And they recommended Whitmer Law.

Okay, so I guess my question is here then, so we're getting contracts on referrals versus sending an RFP out? Yes. Correct, okay. So is this just standard practice or are we gonna just do it on referrals?

Doing it on referrals has been the city's practice as long as I've been here. If the council wants to give alternative direction moving forward, we're happy to do something different.

Okay, thank you. Okay, anyone else? All right, this is a public hearing. Anyone in the public wishing to speak on this item? Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the dais. And I am looking for a motion.

Don't be shy. Mr. Anderson, I move to approve the agreement for professional legal services with Whitmire Law PLLC AC 6201 on an as-needed basis as determined by the city manager or city attorney within the city manager's budget authority for the remainder of FY26 and FY27. Mr. Abbott? Second.

Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. 10.3, Madam Clerk, public hearing.

Thank you, Mayor Lawson. This is public hearing consideration and possible approval of resolution number 3489, authorizing the Financial Services Department to establish an inter-fund loan to the Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Fund and or the Community Development Block Grant Fund and or the Sparks Grants and Donations Fund from the General Fund as needed during fiscal year 2026-2027.

Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor and members of City Council. I'm Tiffany Pugh, Accounting Manager for the Record. With your permission, I would like to present items 10.3 and 10.4 together as they are related.

No problem.

you. These items are an annual compliance request from the financial services department where we are asking for the opportunity to establish an inter fund loan for fiscal year 27 should we need it as well as hold the public hearings as required by NRS. The reasons for these requests is having negative fund even for one day or negative cash in a fund for one day is a violation of Nevada law. So having these inter-fund loans available would be a cash flow management tool that will allow us to stay in compliance. This year we are requesting approval of two inter-fund loans. The first InterFund loan would be from the general fund to the three funds that process transactions for grants. The first, Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Fund. Second, Community Development Grant Fund. And third, there are Sparks Grants and Donations Funds. These are operated on a reimbursement basis, so they may have periods where their cash becomes negative as we await reimbursement. The terms of the loan should we need it would be an amount not to exceed $1 million that is interest-free from the general fund for a period of less than 30 days. The second Interfund loan would be from the Motor Vehicle Maintenance Fund to the General Fund. And the reason we are requesting this Interfund loan for fiscal year 27 is due to the declining fund balance for consecutive years in the General Fund and allow us to manage our cash flow. The terms of this loan, should we need it, would be an interest-free loan in an amount not to exceed $1,200,000 from the Motor Vehicle Maintenance Fund for a period of less than 30 days. So in conclusion, we are... requesting the opportunity to establish an inter-fund loan in advance for fiscal year 27, first from the general fund to the three grant funds, and secondly, from the motor vehicle maintenance fund to the general fund, and conduct two separate public hearings. With that, I can answer any questions you may have. Questions from the council?

Okay, we do this every year, so not a big deal. All right, then this is a public hearing. Anyone in the public wishing to speak on this item? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the dais. And looking for a motion.

Mr. Abbott. I move to approve resolution number 3489, authorizing the Financial Services Department to establish an interim fund loan to the Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Fund, the Community Development Block Grant Fund, and or the Sparks Grants and Donation Fund from the General Fund as needed during FY27.

Ms. Bybee. I'll second that motion.

All right, got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Motion carries unanimously. Do we need any more information for 10.4 Council? If not, I'm looking for a motion.

Mr. Mayor.

Oh, public hearing. I guess we could have the clerk read it first.

Thank you.

Thank you.

This is public hearing consideration and possible approval of resolution number 3490, authorizing the financial services department to establish an inter-fund loan to the general fund from the motor vehicle maintenance fund as needed during fiscal year 2026, 2027. So close.

Questions from the council. All right, this is a public hearing. We'll open it to the public. Anyone wishing to speak on 10.4? Seeing none, we'll close public hearing. I'm looking for a motion. Ms. Bybee.

I move to approve resolution number 3490, authorizing the Financial Services Department to establish an inter-fund loan to the general fund from the Motor Vehicle Maintenance Fund of the City of Sparks as needed during fiscal year 27. Mr. Rodriguez? Second.

We've got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Motion carries unanimously. Madam Clerk, 11.1.

Thank you, Mayor Lawson. This is second reading public hearing discussion and possible adoption of bill number 2855 to modify a final approved plan for the Sparks Galleria to allow outdoor storage and sales areas in association with building materials, sales and supplies and hardware stores with a garden center. uses in the RCSO4 land use designation that consists of approximately 11 acres located at 4755 Galleria Parkway, Sparks, Nevada, APN 51048106 in the NUD New Urban District, Sparks Galleria Plan Development Zoning District.

Good afternoon, Mayor, members of the City Council. My name is Dani Ray, I'm Senior Planner. And I'm here to present this item to you today, which is an amendment to the Sparks Galleria Plan Development Handbook. So on this slide, you can see the red boundary of the 133, excuse me, blue boundary of the 183-acre Sparks Galleria plan development. Outlined in red is the approximately 11-acre subject site that's located east of Pyramid Way, west of Galleria Parkway, and south of Shoppers Way and north of Disk Drive. So the site is currently developed with Home Depot. It's 102,489 square foot building in the retail commercial service and office, or I'll refer to as RCS 04 land use category. So the proposed changes to the handbook include allowing outdoor sales and rentals as well as outdoor storage. And they're limited to two specific uses within the RCS 04 land use category for both building materials, sales and supplies use and hardware stores, including garden centers use. providing the building is 100,000 square feet or larger. The Home Depot is the only building that satisfies that limitation within the plan development. Both uses would require approval of an administrative review, which would dedicate the areas where outdoor sales and rentals and storage activities may occur and to establish the timeframe for which such activities may be conducted. Of note, an administrative review, it's AR260010, was received in the May application intake for the Home Depot. It's currently under review by staff and is dependent upon, approval of that is dependent upon approval of this handbook amendment. So this slide shows potential site plan that illustrates potential outdoor sales, rentals, and outdoor storage locations on the site should both this amendment and the administrative review be approved. So in blue here, we see the outdoor storage locations where they put merchandise overflow. In green is proposed to be the outdoor sales areas, including here. that are restricted by an actual painted area on the sidewalk per the provisions within the handbook to ensure that all of those outdoor seasonal sales and whatnot are kept away from pedestrian areas, keeping pedestrian areas clear and safe. Also shown here is the outdoor rental location. You can see here in red, this is the fire access plan demonstrating fire access can be maintained with approval of the amendment and review and approval of an administrative review where access will be closely scrutinized. Outdoor sales may not exceed 10% of the building footprint of the associated principal use and does not require screening when located adjacent to the front sidewalk or storefront. For safety, pedestrian pathways, a minimum of eight feet in width must be maintained and the green striping would be applied. Sales areas must remain clean and orderly while on display. Similar to the requirements for outdoor storage, outdoor sales areas may not adversely impact drive aisles, pedestrian pathways, or adjacent properties. So parking analysis was prepared by the applicant to support the proposed changes, allowing the outdoor storage sales and equipment and truck rental in the RCS 04 land use designation. While the That portion of the shopping center includes other buildings. The parcel that is known as RCS 04 only contains the Home Depot, but there is a shared parking agreement with those other buildings. So the parking analysis took that into consideration and that analysis is provided in your packets. So there's a total of 540 parking stalls available in the shopping center currently, and the parking study finds a total of 356 parking spaces are required to support the current uses based on the parking standards in the handbook. So this concludes the background and analysis portion of the presentation. There are 10 findings that need to be made. I was able to condense these quite a bit. Yay, it's the last item of the day. So supporting PDA and PDB, their requested modifications to develop standards related to outdoor storage and outdoor sales are consistent with the comprehensive plan and the regional plan because the proposed modifications will facilitate flexibility and continued support of commercial uses in an area planned for commercial uses since 2004. promoting compact development in a location where infrastructure such as sewer, water, storm drains, and police and fire services are available. Supporting goal MG6, policy MG11, and goal CC1 and is in conformance with the uses permitted in the regional plan tier two land use designation. Supporting PDH, the proposed modification of the handbook use standards are not anticipated to adversely impact surrounding uses as they provide for the increased flexibility in the commercial development already allowed in the handbook. And the proposed changes will facilitate the outdoor activities associated with existing commercial uses in the RCSO4 land use designation. And finding PDC fiscal impact analysis was not required because the proposed modifications do not materially change the type or amount of development permitted in the handbook. And for findings PDD, PDE, PDF and PDG, the proposed amendment does not alter the type or amount of development permitted in the plan development. And the proposed amendment would permit again, greater flexibility in the design of specific already allowed commercial uses. within the RCSO4 land use designation. For these reasons, an amendment furthers the interest of the residents and owners and preserves the reliance of residents and owners upon the provisions of the plan and will not be materially impaired and proposed changes are not anticipated to adversely impact properties within or surrounding the plan development supporting PDD, PDE, PDF and PDG. And finally, for findings PEI and PDJ, as proposed, the changes will allow any interested party to pursue development within the planned development in the RCSO4 land use category. And public notice was given as required by NRS and SPARKS Municipal Code on March 31st. As of noon today, there has been no public comment. So staff and the planning commission do recommend approval of this amendment to the city council and the recommended motion is here on your screen. And with that, I'm available for any questions.

Questions from the council. Okay. This is a public hearing. So we'll open it up to the public. Anyone in the public wishing to speak on this item? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the dais and we're looking for a motion. Ms. VanderWaal.

I move to approve bill number 2855 to amend a final approved plan for the Sparks Galleria to allow outdoor storage and sales areas in association with building materials, sales and supplies and hardware stores with a garden center. Uses in the- Sorry. our CS04 land use designation that consists of approximately 11 acres located at 4755 Galleria Parkway, Sparks, Nevada, APN 510-481-06, based on findings PDA through PDJ and the facts supporting those findings as set forth in the staff report.

My apologies. My apologies. This is me not listening as usual. Okay, Mr. Rodriguez. I'll second. I got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Motion carries unanimously. Thanks, Danny. All right, move on to 12.1, public comment. Anyone in the public wishing to comment? Seeing none, we'll call back to the dais. Announcement from the mayor, city council, city manager. Mr. Manager, you have anything? City council got anything? Okay, well then we're up to our favorite subject. We're adjourned.