Board of County Commissioners - Regular Meeting

you

Thank you.

Good morning. It's July 14th at 10 a.m. I'm going to call the Washoe County Board of County Commissioners meeting to order. Thank you all for being here. We'll go ahead and move to item one, which is the salute to the flag. And, you know, Mr. Brooks, we're starting a pattern here. So I'm going to have you do the Pledge of Allegiance, please.

Thank you, we'll move now to roll call please Chair Andrea la president vice chair Garcia here Commissioner Hill here Commissioner Clark is absent Commissioner Herman.

I

the phone? Here. Thank you. County Manager Kate Thomas. Deputy DA Jennifer Gustafson. Present. And I'm Jan Galassini, your County Clerk. Madam, you have a quorum.

Thank you. We are going to move item if There's a couple things I'd like to just be really clear on the agenda so everyone can follow. We're gonna pull item 14. Staff is looking at getting additional information. It'll be brought back at a later time. So item 14 is pulled. And what we're gonna do is we're gonna move the block vote till after item 10. So thank you. All right, we'll move now to

Item three, Manager Thomas. Thank you. This morning we are joined by Pastor Craig from Convo Church to lead us in an invocation.

Good morning, Chair Andriola, Commissioners. Thank you for the opportunity. Let's bow our heads in prayer. Heavenly Father, Creator of the heavens and earth, we come before you this morning, not out of ritual, but of desperate necessity. We present ourselves before you with humble hearts. We recognize you, O God, as the only one true God and that we are your creation, your servants, your children. created to know you, to have personal relationship with you, and called to steward the affairs of this world with honesty, integrity, and wisdom. We acknowledge the truth, the power, and the authority of your holy word, which has formed and guided this great nation from its inception through these 250 years. We have seen greatness in our nation, and we have seen the fruit of our sin and shortcomings. And I prayed that today, not just in this meeting, but across our great nation, that we would return to the words you spoke to King Solomon as he was installed as king over Israel, recorded in 2 Chronicles 7, 14. If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sins and restore their land. This morning, I bring before you these leaders who serve Washoe County as commissioners, and I pray that they humbly seek your face and that they would pursue the knowledge, understanding, and wisdom that from you alone is what is needed to govern in the capacity to which you have called them for such a time as this. I ask that you would make clear what is right and what is wrong, that honor and integrity would be in their hearts and minds. And I also pray that you would put protection around them as they serve, around them as well as around their families. And we thank you, Lord, as they serve. Thank you for them serving our community. And we acknowledge that there is evil in our land, and your word reveals that there is a kingdom that desires to destroy what is from you. But by the name of our only Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, we find forgiveness. We find restoration, salvation, life, and purpose. And so we cancel any assignment of the enemy that would bring anything evil against our servants as they serve you and as they serve the people of this county. This nation belongs to you, Jesus, and this state belongs to you. This county belongs to you. And the authority that you have given to these public servants is a gift. And I pray your Holy Spirit helps them to steward that fragile gift in all that they do. We humbly ask this today in the name of our Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen. Thank you.

Thank you.

We'll now close item three and move to item four. Manager Thomas. Thank you, Madam Chair. This is public comment, and comment heard under this item will be limited to three minutes per person. It may pertain to matters both on and off the commission agenda. Unused time may not be allocated to other speakers. The commission will also hear public comment during individual action items with comment limited to three minutes per person. Comments such as made to the commission as a whole and virtual public comment may be taken when facilities are available.

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

Good morning. It's me, Terry Brooks, again. And today I'm sharing my presentation about different cultures as victims of discrimination. We all live in a melting pot of a variety of cultures and there are a lot of differences among those many cultures. By pointing at one other person, you cannot judge their entire culture because no one person can fully represent an entire culture. There are a lot of different cultures that live all over our nation and different cultures seem to have different ways of communication. Some cultures do not address each other by their names, but they address each other by their titles instead of their names. In some cultures, the people like to stand a lot closer to each other, but in other cultures, the people like to stand further from each other. In some cultures, people deal directly with conflicts with each other, but in other cultures, people try to avoid dealing with conflicts with each other. Some focus more on the group more than on individuals as a way of trying to avoid conflict with other individuals. In some areas, housing is inhabited mostly by people of the same culture. In some of those areas, there is discrimination against any other culture. Some cultures really value receiving an education. more than some other cultures value education. Some employers discriminate against other cultures, while some employers value diversity and welcome several cultures. Some politicians try to value the characteristics of diverse culture, but others discriminate against anyone of a different culture. When people of different cultures refuse to accept each other, no one benefits. But when they listen and learn from each other, everyone benefits. I would like to thank you all for listening to me today and for accepting me in my own cultural weird way. Thank you.

Cynthia Cooper, followed by Jeff Church.

Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Cynthia Cooper. I'd like to comment on item nine, choosing the next library board member. Commissioners, I admire the ambition of the library director, Ms. McClure. Her vision is that all Washoe County third graders will be reading at third grade level. That's when they transition from learning to read to reading to learn. Nothing motivates learning better than curiosity, and for that, the library is a valuable resource. But not just because there are books on whatever subject that could be accessible to any child here, but also because they hold events that are stimulating and educational, like the talks of the wildlife biologist, you know, Phil Harmonic. They have craft workshops, steam workshops, and so on. What the library also does well and must continue to do is they actively ensure that the materials in the library represent all the identities throughout Washoe County. Why is this important? What's that got to do with literacy rate of Washoe third graders? Children and adults pay more attention when they see a connection to the stories they hear, the history lessons being taught, when they see a connection to role models. Ms. McClure has noted that there are discrepancies in literacy rates between different communities of different socioeconomic levels. To mitigate for this, I think the library and the school district should collaborate and issue a library card to every child being registered to attend a public school. Commissioners, I urge you to appoint the next library board member who will defend the valuable principles and practices the library has established that makes sure that the library materials are accessible and relevant to each and every one of us residents in Washoe County. And I wish the library and Ms. McClure the best of luck in achieving widespread literacy throughout Washoe County. Thank you. Thank you.

Jeff Church, followed by Jane Fox.

Good morning. My name is Jeff Church. I run a website, renotaxrevolt.com. I want to address the RTC5 gas increase that occurred recently. I also want to address the ballot measure WC1. I don't have time for that today, so I'm just going to put it on the record in writing. Regarding RTC5, the measure, as intended by the Board of County Commissioners and the Legislature, was implemented with a layered system of checks and balances as required by law and due process. I strongly believe that all three main layers were ignored, not followed, and the formula used was inaccurate. Cutting to the chase, we need the DMV or taxation to review the RTC calculations for compliance and accuracy. Not too much to ask. We need an expedited outside legal opinion as well. I recently met, approximately two weeks ago, with the RTC staff attorney, openly and candidly went over all these issues. To date, I have not received any response to lead me to believe that I am wrong. As part of the system of independent oversight, Washoe County Code 20 requires that the calculations be done by the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles under contract to the county. It's right there. You can read it. Those calculations were never done. I have it in writing from DMV. They were never done. Nevada revised statute requires the calculations be submitted in a public meeting to the RTC board to verify the accuracy and forward data suggesting the increase to you, the county commissioners. From inception until 2022, that was done. However, that then stopped, and to date, it has not been done. There is no evidence that the required increase was ever submitted to you. If it was, it would be on the agenda. Further, the formula for calculations is set in Washoe County Code 20. That formula appears to not have been followed. The backroom formula by the RTC is inconsistent with the required formula, and if true, may be void. We had a system of checks and balances, and had it been followed, I would not be here today. While I'd prefer to wait for the arrival of the new district attorney in January, this objection to the RTC-5 tax must be addressed now. I suggest, again, the first step is having the formula reviewed by the DMV or taxation. Especially DMV is required by law. And the next step is an expedited legal opinion. To summarize again, we need an outside opinion. We need an examination of this to see if the law was followed. And once again, I do object to the ballot measure, WC1. I'll put that on the record as well. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Jane Fox, followed by Donna Dawson Schwartz.

Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, my name is Jane Fox, and I lead the UNR Street Reach Project. I'm here today with members of our team to sincerely express our gratitude for the interlocal agreement between Washoe County and our UNR Street Reach project. This agreement really represents a commitment to advance our shared goals in serving individuals who are unhoused in our community. Specifically, Street Reach will now be able to actively use the HMIS system to communicate with local housing and service providers. We will be able now to provide blood-borne virus testing, wound care, and nursing assessments inside of the CARES campus, at the Resource Center, and in the Safe Camp. We will be able to share aggregate non-identifiable data on linkages to community services, and somewhat most importantly, we will continue our joint work together to collaborate in problem solving related to barriers to care and access. We deeply appreciate your support and your trust in our team and the work that we're doing. This partnership is a key foundational step in our joint investment to serve the county's unhoused population with compassion, with dignity, and the services that they need to move forward, both in health and in well-being. So again, thank you so much. Thank you.

Donna Dawson Schwartz, followed by Maureen McElroy.

My name is Donna Dawson Schwartz. Good morning, Madam Chairman and members of the Commission. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you again about why I would like to be on the Washoe County Library Board of Trustees. After retiring from a 32-year career as a high school English teacher, I've had the opportunity to reflect on the people and the institutions that made my students' success possible. Without question, our libraries were among the most valuable educational partners I had. Throughout my teaching career, I relied on both our school and public libraries to support student learning. Many of my assignments required students to conduct research, evaluate sources, and develop critical thinking skills. Those projects often began in our school library, where I worked closely with our librarian to make sure that students had access to the resources they needed and learned the research strategies that would serve them throughout their lives. From there, students expanded their learning by using our public libraries. There, they discovered additional books, databases, and other resources that helped them deepen their understanding of the topics they were studying. More importantly, they learned that libraries are places of lifelong learning, not simply places to complete a school assignment. Throughout my career, I developed a deep appreciation for the role libraries play in our community. They provide equal access to information, technology, educational opportunities, and welcoming spaces for people of every age and background. They help develop curiosity, literacy, and inform citizens, which are all beneficial to our community. Now that I'm retired from the classroom, I'm looking for meaningful ways to continue serving our community. I believe my experience working with librarians, supporting student research, and seeing firsthand the impact libraries have on individuals and families will help make me an effective member of the Library Board of Trustees. If selected, I would demonstrate my commitment to ensuring that our libraries continue to meet the ever-changing needs of our community. Thank you for your time. your service to our county, and your consideration.

Thank you.

Maureen McElroy, followed by Alana Fitzgerald.

Good morning, Chair Andriola and commissioners.

My name is Maureen McElroy, for the record.

I'm addressing you this morning regarding agenda item number nine, which is the recommendation to appoint one candidate to fill one midterm vacancy on the Washoe County Library Board of Trustees. This morning affords an unexpected positive opportunity for our Washoe County Library system and the community it serves. How fortunate that you, again, have this moment to select someone who will enhance our library board, someone who will engage in a beneficial manner, work towards bettering our library system, support our hardworking library staff, and defend the rights of all of our community members for free access to all the vast resources our system has to offer. My request to you in making this decision is that you not focus just on what district the applicant resides in, but on the essential qualities that will make them an exemplary board member, qualities such as passion for community involvement, true interest in a volunteer experience, experience in working with public libraries, and a demonstrated use and appreciation of libraries. Thank you all for all of your hard work. So appreciated. And thank you for this opportunity to come in. Thank you.

Alana Fitzgerald, followed by Wendy Leonard.

Good morning, Alana Fitzgerald, for the record, and I apologize, a little bit of crossover with what the previous person just covered. Good morning, Chair Andriola and Vice Chair Garcia and commissioners. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm a constituent in District 1, and I'm thankful to my commissioner and all of you for the work you do. with the new and unexpected opening on the Library Board of Trustees, I would like to thank you for the pre-screening that you did before the votes and choices made for the two newest trustees that were placed. I hope that the same parameters previously suggested would be applied, and just highlighting a couple. Having a person who has a record of being engaged with their libraries here in Washoe County, A person who has had previous board experience and who is willing to engage in training specific to the unique situation with the county's oversight and provision of human resources and budget work. And lastly, a person who is not using a personal or political agenda to create chaos for our library system. Sadly, we have been over the last couple of years, we've seen just how one trustee, one, who appears to have been driven by an agenda to devalue the needs of some members of our community, can create challenges for the system, the board, and ultimately the members of our community. The existing county strategic plan Under the fourth basic focus area, innovative services, emphasizes ensuring equitable services, equitable access to services. And having a trustee or trustees who try to inject a personal agenda into board decisions is operating in opposition to this. Also, NRS 379.002 says, it is the goal of the state's publicly supported libraries and information centers to provide the resources and trained staff to meet the information needs of all citizens. I believe we all understand how important it is to have a healthy and vibrant public library system, which in turn helps to keep the community and our county healthy and vibrant as well. So again, I ask you to please keep the suggestions in mind as you make your selection. And thank you very much. I do truly appreciate all that you do and all that the employees of the county do for us every day. Thank you. Thank you.

Wendy Leonard, followed by Ilya Arbatman.

Good morning, Commission and members of the public. I'm here to speak regarding topic number eight, an appointment to the Planning Commission for the at-large north of the river position for the Planning Commission. My name is Wendy Leonard. I'm a retired lieutenant from Washoe County Sheriff's Office. I spent my entire adult career reading, interpreting, and learning to apply the laws in the best interest of the public and mitigating risks to the county. As a manager in the Sheriff's Office, it was vital to understand how laws impacted the risks to the county and to the public. After my retirement 10 years ago, I served as a union representative. I worked within legal agreements with the Washoe County Commission, with the Washoe County Employment OFFICES AND DEALT WITH NEVADA REVISED STATUTES TO COOPERATIVELY RESOLVE EMPLOYMENT ISSUES BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND THE EMPLOYEES. I'VE SERVED ON THE NEVADA COMMUNITY OR THE NORTH VALLEYS COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD. I SPENT OVER TWO YEARS SPEAKING WITH DEVELOPERS AND RESIDENTS AND IMMERSING MYSELF IN THE CONCERNS OF OUR COMMUNITIES. I RAN FOR WASHOE COUNTY COMMISSION DISTRICT FIVE. I learned that it's common that concerns of the community go unheard. And it seems like the community feels like when they present themselves to a board, they're not paid attention to. It's absolutely critical for our boards to listen to, to pay attention to, and to respond to the public in a manner that helps them to understand why decisions are made. I currently serve as an association manager running a local nonprofit that although it has nothing to do with current building and development, it is important to understand how everything works within our community to better our community and our involvement within that community. I currently have no further political aspirations. I'm asking for your consideration to appointment of planning commission and I just wanted to share with you that my strong legal framework is going to be a benefit to the commission as a whole in regards to working within our management plan. And I thank you for your time. Thank you.

Ilya Arbatman followed by Eileen Eklund.

Good morning. My name is Ilya Arbatman. I'm speaking to you on item nine as representative of Freedom to Read Nevada. We are a volunteer organization of community members who came together to support our library system, which has become a local example of a national trend of public and school libraries turning into battlegrounds for our ongoing culture war. We want this to stop. As we have seen, the Library Board of Trustees has a critical role in navigating threats to the library system. The board can either nurture and enable these threats, or it can shut them down. You have before you an excellent pool of applicants for the vacant board seat. I am up here to flag Denise Meyer as absolutely the wrong choice for this position unless we want more of the same antagonism, agitation, and chaos that I'm sure everyone here is very eager to put behind them. To be clear, I'm only raising concern about this candidate in particular because she was the runner-up during the last round of appointments. Her extremely weak application, and I have it here with some of the highlighted areas, does not meet or even respond to the criteria outlined by county staff, which is here. It contains only and exactly five sentences that explain neither her fitness for nor her interest in the role. Many of the applications go into inspired detail about their love of libraries, their backgrounds, the reasons for putting themselves forward, complete with cover letters and even letters of recommendation. Denise Meyer does not attend library board meetings or do anything else to my knowledge to attest to her investment in a thriving library system. County staff puts many work hours, which means taxpayer money, into outlining and conducting a thorough candidate search with specific recommendations. Please do honor that by selecting the best candidate according to your own criteria and process. There are many to choose from who actually meet these criteria and put in the work to deserve appointment. Finally, I'm disheartened to bring this forth during public comment, but unfortunately I think it is necessary to paint an accurate picture of the circles Denise Meyer operates in and what kind of rhetoric and dirty politics we would be inviting into the library system with her appointment. Denise Meyer's unsuccessful run for county commission was enabled by Robert Beatles, who was the primary funder of her campaign. Some of the... C&E reports here. Meyer's campaign regularly sent out offensive, unacceptable text messages attacking Commissioner Garcia. I received many of these texts myself because I live in District 3. It's not appropriate to read them here, but you can find them on one of Beatle's websites, Operation Sunlight. more of that. The language of these vulgar attacks alone and the fact that Denise Meyer thought that they were appropriate to send out en masse regardless of their target already disqualifies her from holding any respectable position. Given however that they were directly targeting a member of the same board that would be overseeing her were she to become a trustee, it seems glaringly obvious that she is not the right choice for this position. Please save us the heartache and turmoil sure to follow the appointment of another unqualified trustee who is volatile and aligned with self-proclaimed political operatives who function via disruption and chaos and who is likely interested in the library only to augment her own political influence. As Alana Fitzgerald says, the prescreening question number three would disqualify Denise Meyer, who has twice at least run for, she's run for council and commission and failed. So we can only assume that seeking appointment is another way into politics. Do not appoint Denise Meyer. Thank you. Thank you.

Eileen Eklund, followed by Bree Schmidt.

Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Eileen Eklund, for the record, and I live in Sparks. Thank you once again for the opportunity to speak, and of course, I too am going to talk about items. Nine, the Washoe County Library Board Trustee. Today you'll be voting to replace a trustee and I congratulate you on having an impressive pool of candidates to choose from. I'm here to ask you to appoint someone who truly understands and loves libraries. Someone who understands the critical role they play in promoting literacy and a lifelong love of reading and learning in our young people. Someone who understands how our library staff works with local schools and educators to improve opportunities and outcomes for all our youth. Someone who understands that libraries are also critical sources of information, education, training, and connection for everyone in our community, especially in this digital age. Someone who knows how important it is for every library branch to be attuned to the needs of the community it serves, from toddlers to seniors and everyone in between, and to be an inclusive and welcoming space for everyone who enters its doors. Over the last few years, I've heard people say that libraries are no longer necessary because, quote, I have a library here in my pocket. I've heard people say that they think libraries suffer from mission creep and should just stick to loaning out books. I've heard people imply that our libraries are in some way broken because they welcome everyone who comes through their doors, no matter who they are, what they believe, or how much money they have. Our libraries aren't broken. They're one of the last free, egalitarian community spaces we have. And in today's fragmented and contentious society, they're more important than ever. I'm here to ask you to appoint someone who will be a tireless advocate for that vision of what our libraries can and should be. That doesn't mean keeping libraries exactly as they are. Of course, any institution needs to keep learning and growing, reshaping itself in response to changes in community needs and desires. But our library staff is fully equipped to do this. They're smart, they're committed, and they're deeply engaged and in tune with the communities they serve throughout Washoe County. We need to trust and support this excellent staff and choose trustees who love, value, and support our libraries, trustees who will be enthusiastic and dedicated advocates for the libraries we will need for our future. Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Bree Schmidt, followed by Penny Brock.

Good morning, commissioners. My name is Bree Schmidt. I'm a local advocate and activist here in Reno. And I just wanted to speak to the library board appointees. I'm just going to ditto what most of the people have said already. We're looking for somebody on the library board who is able to steadfastly defend the library as an institution of First Amendment rights. It's really one of the few protected places for free speech, for free communication, and the freedom of knowledge, as well as the freedom to read. It's really important. I think everybody in this room can agree on the value of the freedom to read. And with that, I will just share with you a library joke. Libraries are taller than people think because they have so many stories. Thank you so much.

Penny Brock followed by Steve Malone.

Penny Brock, for the record. I'm here to talk about election integrity, of course. When you took your oath of office to become commissioners, you swore to uphold the Constitution, which includes the Bill of Rights. We are not being allowed our First Amendment right to redress you, our elected officials. Why am I saying that? Because on the agenda, 6A1 is the road to the 26th presentation. by our ROV. His presentation, I have to assume, will be a PowerPoint. It was not put as an attachment to the agenda. Number two, this should have allowed for public comment, which it did not. The other item is 7F1, which is in a block vote. I would ask that that be pulled out separately because it deals, again, with our elections. Voter observers have asked for more cameras and monitors in the current mail ballot processing room for the 2026 election to assist in meaningful observation as required by federal and state law. These additional cameras and monitors could be moved to the new facility. When we asked George Guthrie why there were not more cameras as needed in the current mail ballot processing room, he said, because they didn't have enough money. Well, in the budget that you approved in May, you gave the ROV $3.4 million for house selection operations, furniture, personnel, and storage. So therefore, it looks like it's an open checkbook for our elections department manager. Under House elections operations, he could use some of that fund to buy, I estimate, about seven cameras that are needed currently in this mail ballot processing room. And the monitors, I don't know, maybe four more monitors to pick up the six cameras. But this is a very important right. We are to have meaningful observation per federal and state law, which we do not have now. This is an obstruction. This is lack of transparency and it disenfranchises the observers from doing what we have the right to do. Therefore, I would ask that the consideration be given for you to encourage the ROV manager to put more cameras in the mail ballot processing room for transparency. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Steve Malone, followed by Nicholas St. John.

Hi, my name is Steve Malone. I'm a retired union operator, native Nevadan, been here working in this town for 38 years. I'm 58 years old. I'm here to comment about what was said at the Citizens Advisory Board meeting, and it's about the food trucks, and it's about taking the Sun Valley driveway from the state of Nevada for Washoe County. I've been in Sun Valley for 56 years. If you think the Washoe County is going to take care of the people of Sun Valley better than the state does, you're wrong. And the reasoning up at the Citizen Advisory Board meeting was the snowplows. Your snowplows, they're dispatch priority. No matter where you are, Sun Valley's last on the list. Always has been. And I want to remind you people what Washoe County did to us back when Obama was in office. They closed our pool. They closed our park. They turned it over to Sun Valley G.I.D. And they go out and charge us $350 a month recreational fee to keep the pool and park open while we're still paying the county the same money that we were paying when they were supposed to run it. The problems in Sun Valley isn't Sun Valley Drive from there to 7th. It's from 7th to Pyramid Highway. That's what needs to be addressed. And the county did that about five, six years ago. Go out there and take a look at it. Go take a look at their artwork and stuff that they put up that you can't even see because of the weeds. We have an issue from Sun Valley Drive out to Golden Valley. I live on that street. You ought to see the way they drive on that street. You have samurais coming down there with their jake brakes on. That tells you that they're not doing 35 miles an hour. That's where the issues are. Not tearing up a road that's not broke. It rained out there last night and it didn't flood. That was another excuse was the 100-year flood. I've seen two of those in the 56 years I've been here. Sun Valley did just fine. And then I'd like to comment on the food trucks. You guys are here to help the community and help the businesses of Sun Valley. Not be encouraging other people out there taking away from the businesses of Sun Valley. And that's what these food trucks are doing. We had an event out there the other night and Sun Valley GID member went down there and said he didn't understand a word that was said there. Obviously not in English. And these people are taking away business from people that are paying taxes, that have businesses that are paying your guys a salary. And it's being encouraged by her. She's the one that had the event.

Mr. Malone, I'm going to ask you to stop the clock real quick. I just want to remind you that the comments are to be made to the body as a whole.

Well, the comments are going to be made where they're being made because the body and the whole is not the one putting the events out. They're taking business away from the other businesses.

No, I appreciate that comment. No, you don't. I just want to reiterate that we have to abide by the boundaries within public comment.

Okay. Explain to me if you had a business out there how you would feel if the people you're paying tax money to is taking business away from you by encouraging these food trucks. You've got a tamale stand sitting in front of AutoZone every 6 to 8 a.m. on Sun Valley Drive. People pulling off on the main drag. And this is being encouraged and nothing being done by you people. That's the problem out there. So, and like I said, taking Sun Valley Drive away from the state is a very, very bad idea. Washoe County, when they go broke, Sun Valley's the first place they take money away from. Let the state take care of their problems out there.

Thank you. Nicholas St. John, followed by Veronica Cortez.

Thank you.

Thanks.

For the record, Nicholas St. John. Last time I was here, I brought in this sign so that the public can see what I'm talking about because, especially for cameras, they don't necessarily show this. So this was the... Information that I had shared you guys each have that in front of you. This is the Interesting part in early voting so what you see there is the lip dip below the line all these negative spikes are Where ballots were taken from third party voters and moved from third party? apparently into Republican and Democrat ballots and I asked for the ROV to explain that, and I was told by Kate that he would explain it. Something came up that he couldn't at the last meeting. I request that he would do that in this meeting. Since then, I've added another piece to this, which is the election day. And I found that we have the same thing. So all total 487 votes, ballots were moved from third party redistributed mostly into Republican and Democrat ballots. I've run this analysis on every other county in the state. Not one single county, not even Clark, which has 5.2 times more ballots or voters than Washoe, has anything close to this. This makes us a laughing stock for not being able to even get our counts right. So when you see 2,929 votes or ballots from third party and then they get removed, 304 of them into third party, I would think that the commissioners would consider that that would be something worth looking into. Did you guys do that last time? No, you ignored me. So I'm here again to try to get your attention to have the ROV explain why these ballots are moving. Is it a small amount? No, 15% in early voting was removed from third party and redistributed to Republican and Democrat. And then for election day, it was 19% were removed from third party and redistributed into Republican the Republican and Democrat ballots. We're the only county in the state that this happened to. So I'm asking you that if you would like more information on where we can have a dialogue during your item, you can actually call me back up here and we can actually have a dialogue about this issue. So in the meantime, hopefully, Kate, you've had this set up and we can hear from the ROV why they were moving ballots and why the counts weren't accurate when I download them from the Secretary of State.

Thank you. Veronica Cortez, followed by Oscar Williams.

Good morning, everybody. Veronica Cortez, the lunch lady. I brought a book today. This book is actually meetings that I've been going to since December of 2024. Now, during that time, I was placed on the Citizens, appointed to the Citizens Advisory Board, although I am in District 5. We used the One Mile Amendment, and Garcia appointed me to the board, so thank you so much. And as I was reviewing these minutes, we got a lot of work done when I first got on the board. We cleaned up properties, we listened to the people, we did what the citizens wanted. And I was given all this handbooks and codes of conducts and all this stuff that I was required to follow to be on the cab. And one of these things that I highlight is that It's the expectations, so you can find this. This is the February 29th, 2024 staff board meeting, and it goes along how there is code of conduct within the cabinet. It has values like integrity and effective communication, quality public service, tolerance, fairness, courtesy, and professionalism. Perfect. When I read this, I was like, that's exactly how I want to advocate for Sun Valley since I was born in St. Mary's, taking out their grandma, grandpa out there. So this is what I call my accountability book. And I go through and I highlight things that have been promised to us or said to us, and here we are a year and a half later, and the things are not being done. So some things I would like to highlight specifically for Sun Valley, we did get approved the amount that we were looking for, the $25 million, so we could cover the $80 million beautification Sun Valley thing. Great, I'm excited. Like our commissioner said to quote, this is 80 years of crisis in Sun Valley, which I honestly personally can't agree with because my grandparents came in the 60s and it was amazing. We had a two lane road, everybody was working agriculture. So I would just like to From somebody who's been in Sun Valley all their life, third generation in, now going on fifth generation, we have not been in an 80-year crisis. And I'm sorry that our commissioner feels that way, that's sad. Also, I would just like to just put out some other quotes that were said. You can find these on the minutes from the cab. According to these, according to... The citizens, we've been asking for bus pullouts for the boulevard. If the buses can't get out, we can't get by. When we brought it up, because we've been asking for it for a year, we were told by our representative, now you can walk along with me during this or you can fight it. That's up to you. I can assure you I understand. I can respect your stance. But unfortunately, we don't feel that way. So I would hope we can reconsider What we're doing. Thank you.

Oscar Williams followed by Brian Wadsworth.

Good morning. Excuse me. I'm Oscar Williams. Pleasure to be here today. I want to talk about item 11 and with what time I have left, item 7F1. Item 11 is the proposed bill draft requests. And I noted in the staff report, quote, the board requested that staff inquire as to the likelihood of a bill regarding automatic recounts of elections. I appreciate that sentiment. However, I think there was maybe a missed opportunity here. It's not that we want automatic recounts. It's a better definition of how recounts are actually conducted, okay? We would be better served by a bill draft request that would amend the wording of NRS 293.404, Clause 3. I'll get to that in one second. Let me take a step back and give you a little anecdote. I think we can all agree. You guys like math? I think we can all agree that four times four equals 16. Now, if you're going to audit your own math, are you going to do four times four again? Or are you going to pursue a different method? Maybe 16 divided by four equals four. So you find the root, right? That's how you check your math, not with another multiplication. You check it with your division. Now, let's apply that logic to our elections. NRS 293-404 Clause 3 says that the recount must be conducted using the same methods as the original tabulation. That is a vendor cover-your-ass move. Pardon my French, but if you're a vendor, you'll love that. But it's got nothing to do with election integrity or voter trust. If we merely change the language of that Clause 3 of NRS 293-404 to read, the recount shall be done by hand, Problem solved. The recount shall be conducted by hand, not by the same method as the original tabulation was conducted. That's the old wording. We want some new wording. And I would recommend that you revisit your desire for integrity in the recount by considering my suggestion here on revision of NRS 200. Does that make sense? I'm trying to make sense. I hope so. Let me move on to item 7F1. That's the interlocal agreement. with the Secretary of State regarding VREMS and NOINC. For one, I'd ask that it be removed from the block vote and be open for proper discussion and separate vote. Basically, the Secretary of State wants Washington to pay for the NOINC poll pads that he refuses to classify as critical infrastructure. and thus ignore proper inspection and approval by his office, right? He's ignoring, passing the buck of his responsibility to ensure that the thing is safe, all right? The VRMS comes with the strings attached, as Washington has had to upgrade its equipment to accommodate the VRMS and automated signature verification, which voters and taxpayers have not been asked to approve and have not approved. I'm out of time. I wish I had more time, but I would say no.

Thank you. Brian Wadsworth, followed by Rob Pierce.

I found it. I found the phone, guys. Good luck.

I got all your notes.

Go ahead.

Good morning. For the record, my name is Brian Wadsworth, and I'm a member of the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe, and I'm also running as the Democratic candidate for Washoe County Commissioner for District 5. I wanted to make a couple comments on a couple of agenda items. One, I was super excited to see a lot of the agenda items in the consent agenda regarding the audits for Washoe County. My background is in auditing and accounting. I spent several years working for NDOT in their internal audit division conducting compliance audits on their various contracts and agreements, as well as spending several years working in the governor's finance office as an executive branch auditor. So conducting performance audits, looking at efficiency and effectiveness for EXECUTIVE BRANCH AGENCIES. AND SO I'M DISAPPOINTED IN THE AUDIT COMMITTEE. I NOTICED THEY CANCELLED SEVERAL MEETINGS LAST YEAR AND THEY'VE HAD A COUPLE MEETINGS THIS YEAR BUT HOPEFULLY THEY CAN CONTINUE HAVING THEIR QUARTERLY MEETINGS. I THINK AUDITS ARE VERY IMPORTANT. I THINK AS AN AUDITOR WE SHOULDN'T BE SCARED OF AUDITORS. I THINK THEY'RE A GREAT TOOL FOR OUR GOVERNMENT OR ANY BUSINESS SEEING WHERE THE MONEY IS BEING SPENT OR EVEN LOOKING AT THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THOSE AGENCIES ensuring that they're running as efficiently and effective as possible. And second, I just wanted to advocate for Catherine Yarte for Washoe County Planning Commission. Surprisingly, in this day and age, having a Democrat advocate for a Republican. So I was just really impressed with Catherine Yarte, and she was one of the Republican candidates for Washoe County Commissioner for District 5. I was just impressed by her advocacy and seeing her out within the communities at all the different meetings I was at, whether the cab meetings or here or other community events, she was always out there and asking questions and wanting to learn more about the county. And as a member of the Pyramid Lake Paiute tribe, and please stand me if I'm wrong, but I believe she was the only Republican candidate for Washoe County Commissioner, District 5, to even mention tribes and talk about tribal sovereignty. And as a tribal member, that means a lot to me. And I think we need more representation, more people thinking about tribes. We have in District 5, we have the Reno Sparks Indian Colony, and then my tribe within District 5. We also have Summit Lake Paiute Tribe, as well as the Washoe Tribe here in Washoe County. So Tribal representation matters and it's great to have someone potentially being on the Washoe County Planning Commission that would take into account tribes and our tribal sovereignty. And thank you.

Thank you. Rob Pierce. While Rob approaches, we do not have speakers from Incline Village nor Gerlach.

Good morning, chair and commissioners. My name is Rob Pierce. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. Unfortunately, I will not be able to sit around for the meeting today. I have a prior engagement that I'm actually late for. But four years ago, you guys appointed me to the Planning Commission, and I want to say that it has been one of the greatest honors of my life. Thank you. During my years, I've approached every meeting, every application, and every vote with the understanding that decisions have a lasting impact on the residents of Washoe County. I've worked hard to be prepared to ask thoughtful questions, to listen carefully to staff, the applicants, and the public, and to make decisions based upon our master plan, our county code, state law, and the matters before us. Over the past four years, I have maintained an excellent attendance record and have devoted countless hours outside the meetings reviewing staff reports, visiting project sites, and studying the issues before us. I believe that my preparation and consistency matter, and I've already taken that I've taken that responsibility seriously. As many of you know, I'm currently candidate for County Commissioner District 5. And regardless of the outcome of the general election, my commitment to serving Washoe County remains unchanged. Public service has been a significant part of my life for many years, and I would welcome the opportunity to continue serving on the Planning Commission if you would believe that I have earned your confidence for another term. Planning is more important now than ever. Our county continues to experience growth and we face increasingly complex issues involving infrastructure, transportation, housing, open space, public safety, and responsible land uses. I believe my experience, institutional knowledge, and dedication allows me to continue contributing in a meaningful and productive way. This is not the time to appoint somebody new to the commission. There is too much going on. But if you don't choose me, please choose someone with experience. I have worked hard for these last four years to try to get to where we are. And putting somebody new in there, I don't think is the right decision right now. I respectfully ask for the consideration for reappointment for another four years. If reappointed, I will continue to serve with the same integrity, professionalism, independence, and commitment that I have demonstrated throughout my term. Thank you for your trust, your consideration, and for the opportunity to serve the people of Washoe County.

Thank you. There's nobody else signed in. Thank you. We'll go ahead and close item four and now move to item five.

Manager Thomas. Thank you. Item number five is commissioners, county managers, announcements, reports, and updates to include board and commission updates, requests for information, or topics for future agendas. I have two quick things, if I may, Madam Chair. We have some openings. We have a partial term for the Open Space and Regional Parks Commission. I'll remind everybody this is an advisory board to the Board of County Commissioners. It's responsible for giving guiding decisions on the county's parks, open space, and recreation resources. That is a partial term. that begins that appointment through June 30, 2027. The deadline to apply is Wednesday, July 15th, so if you're interested, you have a very short timeframe. Please go to our website. And then we do have ongoing openings that are specific to a district for the Citizens Advisory Board. Those are open indefinitely, but please refer to your CAB district by going to our website to see and explore those openings. The only other thing I had, Madam Chair, is that I remind everyone that we have our summer break coming up. Our next meeting is not until August the 25th. So we have five weeks between the business that the board does today and the end of August. So just want to remind everybody of that. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Herman, do you have anything?

Yes, I do. Thank you, Madam Chair. Due to the fact that we've had more than one person speak on 7F1, I would suggest that we remove it from consent and have it heard separately.

Okay. When we get to consent, we'll remember your request. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Is there anything else? No, that will do it for now.

Okay, great. Commissioner Hill. Madam Chair and community, I just wanted to celebrate the reopening of the Women's Crossroads facility. It was an incredible day, and so much healing has already happened in those buildings, but they needed the attention, and I just want to commend the board for... really supporting these programs of ensuring that community members have second and third chances to really get their lives together. We heard from a mom who got her children back and it just was very touching and exciting to see that we're reinvesting in folks who have been left behind in this community. And I just want to commend the staff and the commission for the work on that. So it was a great day. Thank you.

Thanks, and I'll just add kudos to the staff for creating such a welcoming, welcoming place to be. They did a great job.

Vice Chair Garcia. Everyone, thank you to everyone who came and did public comment. A couple of the public commenters mentioned the Sun Valley Boulevard Improvement Project, so I just wanted to touch on that. First and foremost, thank you to Commissioner Hill. She is the chair of the RTC board, if you didn't know. We have an amazing board over there at RTC that's comprised of Reno Sparks and Washoe County. And as you can imagine, there's a lot of competing needs and desires, I think, from board members and for the first time in history I think that Sun Valley Boulevard was prioritized as the number one federal priority for RTC's board and that goes to show the leadership and the open-mindedness and just, you know, Professionalism on that board. I can't thank them enough because we submitted three different federal grants Didn't get the first one didn't get the second one and third third one was a charm We were looking for that last 25 million dollar gap funding and this is really a special project because we have endot and Washington County, RTC, and now the federal government, all who have skin in the game to improve this really antiquated stretch of highway. For the first time in history, this highway, we will no longer see the ditches and culverts that so many cars flip into or bicycles or even wheelchairs slip into. Those will be covered up. It will be paved over with brand new bicycle facilities, sidewalks, lighting, improved bus stops and most importantly and it's not as exciting to talk about but it's so desperately needed is we've never had a modernized storm water drainage system in Sun Valley and so we're really excited that this project will for the first time bring that safety and infrastructure that's so desperately needed out there. In total, it's an $87 million project as of today, but I just want to thank the board members, thank our congressional delegates, and our Washoe County staff for being such good partners. I think this is going to be a really transformative and historic project for our region, so thank you.

Thank you. I'll go ahead and then close Item 5, and we'll move now to presentations. Manager Thomas.

Thank you very much. This morning we are joined by Andrew McDonald, our registrar of voters. He's here to give us our quarterly update regarding the road to the 2026 general election. And he's joined by his deputy registrar, Reggie Greer.

Welcome. Good morning. Good morning, Chair Andriola, Vice Chair Garcia, and commissioners. My name is Andrew McDonald, the Washoe County Registrar of Voters. Thank you for having me today. As we drive down the road to the 2026 November general, I wanted to provide some historical data to help grasp what we could expect in November and update you on efforts of our office that we'll be undertaking for and moving up until the general election. Please note that we are only 112 days away from election day and 95 days from early voting. So we are in the thick of it already. The next slide, due to time, I probably won't be going too detailed into some of these slides, but we currently have 326,638 active registered voters. You can see the breakdown between Democrat, nonpartisan, Republican, and other. YOU'LL SEE A DRAMATIC DROP IN ACTIVE REGISTRATIONS IN OCTOBER OF 2025 AS THAT KIND OF ROLLER COASTER REALLY COMES DOWN AS WE COMPLETED BULK VOTER LIST MAINTENANCE FROM ACTIVE TO INACTIVATING VOTERS. that did not uh meet the spirit of becoming still an active voter and again right before the 90-day navra or blackout period in march of 2026 which is 90 days prior to the june election you'll also see that dip and now it's coming back up as people are starting to register to vote VOTER LIST MAINTENANCE EFFORTS, WE ARE WORKING AGAIN ON BULK LIST MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES AS I SPEAK. WE MAILED APPROXIMATELY 19,500 AFFORDABLE ADDRESS CONFIRMATION CARDS TO VOTERS AFTER THE PRIMARY CANVAS OF THE VOTE. THIS IS REQUIRED BEFORE ANY INACTIVATIONS WOULD OCCUR. THIS INCLUDES 13,800 DUE TO THE PRIMARY UNDELIVERABLE BALLOTS FROM THIS LAST ELECTION, CARDS THAT WENT OUT, 3200 THROUGH THE ERIK OR ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION INFORMATION CENTER PROGRAM, AND ABOUT 2500 BECAUSE OF UNDELIVERABLE MAIL BALLOTS FROM PRIOR TO THE, NOT MAIL BALLOTS, FROM UNDELIVERABLE MAIL PRIOR TO THE PRIMARY ELECTION. Voters have 33 days from July 2nd mailing, that's when we mailed, to respond and prevent the registration from becoming inactive. They can do this by mailing back the postcard that they receive, and again, it's forwarded to them, visiting our office or updating their voter registration online. Our office has only until August 5th to complete valid inactivations per the National Voter Registration Act bulk list maintenance deadline. After this date, we can no longer perform bulk voter list maintenance on the voter rolls. However, if a voter 1Z, 2Z comes in and does what they need to do, of course, we will take action per their request. If a voter becomes inactive, they will not receive a mail ballot. However, they can reactivate the registration anytime before the general election by updating the voter registration record. The next slide is a couple quick graphs. First, historical turnouts for the past general elections and voting method split. So a 60 to 70% turnout in the 2026 general should be expected. based on history, anything above 70% would actually be a very, very strong voter turnout. In 2018 general election, the dominant method for voters was in-person voting, and that was prior to COVID-19 and mandatory Nevada universal mail-in ballot. So out of a 70% turnout, 63% of the voters voted in person, while only 7% voted their mail ballot or absentee ballot at that time. In 2020, after COVID-19, all voters were sent a universal mail-in ballot, and out of that 83% turnout, 43.5 voted their mail ballot and 39.6 voted in person. By 2022 general voters were used to getting a universal mail-in ballot and utilized it out of the 64 percent turnout 34 percent voted by mail and 30 percent in person So in 2024 general election out of the 79 percent turnout 39 percent voted by mail and nearly 40 percent voted in person What I'm assuming for the 2026 general, it will likely model the 2024 general election and roughly be a 50-50 split. Of course, I have no crystal ball, but that's based on historical data, what I'm projecting. As you look to the road to elections for the mail ballot trends, this is an eye chart, and I apologize there's no different colorations here, but you see at the bottom all the different elections. And what I really want you to focus is on the right side, or minus one slash election day. That is when the majority of mail ballots are being dropped. ON ELECTION DAY. THEREFORE, OUT OF THE FOUR OF THE LAST SIX ELECTIONS, WE SAW 20% OF ALL MAIL BALLOTS BEING DROPPED ON OR SHORTLY AFTER ELECTION DAY. SO IN THE PRIMARY OF 2026, WE RECEIVED 21% OF OUR TOTAL MAIL BALLOTS ON ELECTION DAY SLASH NIGHT, LEAVING US TO PROCESS 12,500 BALLOTS ON ELECTION DAY. If we're expecting 100% more turnout, if you will, in this next election, it's possible that 25,000 ballots would be dropped on us on election day. Therefore, it's a large work effort because we're receiving those ballots at night, and we would be working multiple shifts to have to process those. And unfortunately, at this point, we don't have the institutional knowledge to be able to put two different 12-hour shifts together. IT DOES TAKE ABOUT 12 HOURS, I MENTIONED IN MY PREVIOUS COMMENTS WHEN I WAS UP HERE, TO PROCESS A MAIL BALLOT FROM BEGINNING TO END, DEPENDING ON THE MAIL BALLOT DROP FROM THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE PER DAY. SO THAT BEING SAID, THE AMOUNT OF MAIL BALLOTS DROPPED ON AN ELECTION NIGHT CREATES A BOTTLENECK DEPENDING ON WHEN THEY'RE RECEIVED, HOW MANY ARE RECEIVED. THE BIGGEST BOTTLENECK IS REALLY SIGNATURE VERIFICATION, EXTRACTION, AND THE COUNTING GROUP. If given a grant, I would use to buy more signature verification stations and ballot extraction machines for the new warehouse. We really don't have a lot of space to put these in for this election, but upcoming warehouse, that's where I would spend that money if given or found a grant to do so. Automatic signature verification, next slide. As you know, we process mail ballot envelopes through our mail ballot sorter. This election, we rolled out automatic signature verification on the mail ballot sorter. And ASV software is used to compare the signature on the vote by mail envelope against the reference signature that we have in the database. If the signature matches and exceeds the threshold, it's automatically accepted. If not, it goes to bipartisan teams of two to check the manual signature. In this last election, 19,432 signatures were automatically verified, or 31% of all mail ballots, saving 324 labor hours of processing. Again, we took a very conservative approach at 72, this election and confidence level. Down the road, if we felt comfortable lowering that, we would actually process more mail ballots even faster. By NRS, we are supposed to audit 1% of the ASV, and we did 100% more, which is 2% of auditing, and 374 signatures were audited. Moving on for the BMDs and ADA carts, this was the first election we used both ballot marking devices and ADA's curbside voting, and we received very positive feedback from the community. They loved the tangible ballot. They loved the fact that they could cast the ballot themselves and see it go in. The initial concerns about voters leaving their ballot behind as a receipt, we thought that might happen. It actually didn't happen. But staff will continue monitoring and training up. We had a couple discrepancies, as I mentioned, in Canvas to the vote. So we will continue our education there. Curbside voting, we hit about 40 folks who voted curbside. And I'm really passionate about this. And I'm hoping we can continue to get people to curbside vote that want to curbside vote. Just because you may be disabled doesn't mean you can't get out of your car. But if you can't, for some reason, we are providing that service to you to vote in the comfort of your car. We will also be taking out a fully linked graphic in our sample ballot booklet. Moving on to vote centers slash super centers. We are right-sizing our vote centers based on data-driven decisions. Looking over data from the last election, we offered too many early voting locations, and the numbers actually prove that. Thus, we'll be saving taxpayer dollars by opening six less early voting locations over those two weeks and 13 less Election Day locations on Election Day compared to a normal general election. The trade-off for far less locations are super centers. We will be placing one super center in each commissioner district based on the region, how many voters voted, and looking at all the data. We've been doing that, and the five locations we are proposing right now are Depoli Middle School, Reno-Sparks Convention Center again, Spanish Springs High School, O'Brien Middle School, and Hugg High School. A super center is really designed to enhance the voter experience significantly by greater capacity and providing better customer service than a traditional vote center. Each super center would offer additional ballot marking devices, additional check-in stations, subsequently larger election day boards to improve voter flow on election day. That's my time, I apologize. I can keep going or I can, whatever you'd like me to do here today.

Well, how much further do you have? I don't want to catch off.

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

We're going to let you power through.

Okay. Per NRS, I'm to place a minimum of 15 early voting locations and 25 for Election Day. We will exceed that number, so we're still within NRS guidelines. However, we'll start looking at vote centers each election and looking at the data over and over from here on out. remember voters you still have two weeks to early vote you have almost three weeks to vote your mail ballot and you have election day so there are plenty of ways to vote just want to highlight our partnership with washoe county school district about 67 of our election day locations are from the washoe county school district 67 on election day that is huge and we can't do without that partnership with them and we're also very excited to work with our high school recruiting program so that high schoolers can be involved in civic engagement, but also earn some dollars there. Federal actions, don't really need to touch on this too much, but I guess the bottom line and highlights is Washoe County update is, nothing really changing for the 2026 general election based on the federal lawsuits that were filed again at this time. No changes for Washoe County and some important dates on the last slide. Sample ballots are coming October 13th by deadline. We're hoping to do before then in state ballots on the 14th early voting begins on the 17th ends on the 30th election in the third canvas of the vote on the 13th of November. And with that I'd like to ask if there are any questions.

Thank you. That was powering through, and you still actually did a great job. Take a deep breath. Thank you. Thank you so much. I really appreciate the efficiency in terms of the analysis of the consolidation of the super centers that you're calling them. I'm glad to see that Reno Sparks Convention Center is back on there. I'm glad that they, I hope they continue to support that very important part of our community. I do think someone shared with me that there's a quote that might be applicable and it's to speak to your slide, especially on the percentage of ballots that come in on the election day and vote early and in person, right? To help with ballot processing. So everyone vote early, vote in person. So I'll open it up to my colleagues. I'm going to go ahead with Commissioner Herman. Do you have any questions?

There I am. It's a little tricky, but okay. Thank you so much for all the information. It's great you're getting these voting places slimmed down a little bit, and I think I'm impressed with that. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Commissioner Ehrman.

Thank you. Vice Chair Garcia. Thank you, Madam Chair. You touched on the question I had. Can you pull up the slide when you talked about the bottlenecks? Right there, yes. OK, so as elected officials, we often interact with people of all ages, new voters, people who have mobility issues, the whole spectrum. So in terms of our communication, we want to emphasize if they want to use the mail-in ballot, they need to drop it into their mailbox, have it out to USPS no later than Can you give us a recommendation?

So the Secretary of State this last election said a week before Election Day. I was kind of hammering on three days before Election Day, please just drop it with us, just ensuring that your ballot will get there on time. So for you all, I would say three days before Election Day, please just come into a vote center, drop it with us. It comes directly back here. There is no potential of getting lost in the USPS mail or not getting postmarked, et cetera. So we effectively become the USPS at that point in time.

Okay. So you're saying the bottleneck occurs when everybody's just holding onto those mail-in ballots. And I've been, I've done this before where I just hold it. It's on my desk or in my car. And then on election day, I just drop it in. So you're saying get those, get those in the ballot boxes by October 30th, before October 30th, so that you have the time to process effectively.

Yeah, and let me, I know we're kind of short on time, but let me just say, too, the answer is yes to that. A mail ballot goes through a series of steps, and that is the first pass of our order, automatic signature verification, second manual signature verification, second pass, batching in groups of ballots from 15 to 25, ballot extraction, counting board adjudication, duplication due to errors, tips, tears, rips, soiled ballots, scanning ballots, digital adjudication for voter intent, tabulation, finally uploading of results. All that is processing mail ballots. If you look at in-person voting, it's very fast. Very efficient. Once the ballot is scanned into the tabulator, those come back on election night and are uploaded. So I used to vote by mail every single time. This last election is the first time I ever voted in person because I see the amount of work and people continue to say, we're last, we're last, we're last, we're last for a few reasons. But Nevada isn't necessarily last. California has a 30-day certification. We have a 10-day certification, right? But my goal is to always become more efficient. But to do so, if folks wait to the last minute, they're putting a lot of work on our department, which is fine. But we're not going to get results out faster. If you vote earlier, results come out faster. And there's a lot less work to do on us.

And obviously voting is a personal preference and we're never going to be the ones to tell them how they should or could vote. But we will gently remind folks that October 30th is the day. If you have it sitting on your desk or in your car, please drop it into a mailbox.

Thank you so much. Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Hill. Thank you for the presentation. Great work on this last election again. And really looking forward to the general election with all of the new accessibility things that you and your team have built in. And I'm just making sure that the Northwest Library is still going to be an early voting center.

It will be. We didn't have it, I think, the last election due to a lot of the air conditioning. I think they're replacing like 20-something air conditioning units. But yes, I've got confirmation from the ACM, Dave Slaro, that we will have it for early voting and election day.

That was the only complaint I got of the entire election. So great work. And I'm glad to hear it's back online and won't be replaced by a super center because I think it's a pretty busy location. But Other than that, just we'll support you with the messaging. And I like voting early and in person. So maybe we can get that movement going to give you less of that last minute paperwork that you get extreme pressure from all these outside forces on. So we'll do what we can to support you with that.

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

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

Yeah, so we, our office, ROV headquarters is specifically open and they have that at least. Right. But that is it.

So it may be another thought to see if there's more accessibility between those few days. But it's less of an emergency this time around because we are able to accept mail-in ballots later because of the Supreme Court ruling. Correct. at least one more way that we can ensure that folks can have their voices heard and be part of this representative democracy. But thank you very much. Thank you.

Well, I think we might start a new hashtag, right? Hashtag vote early, vote in person, vote early, vote in person, October 3rd deadline. Drop off your ballot here. There's all kinds of communication, I think, that would be helpful, and I know that the communication team is always supportive of doing what we can to get the message out and be accurate and transparent. I do want to just, if I could, Manager Thomas, I'll just maybe direct this to you, that maybe we could follow up either with ACM, Gustafson, and Mr. St. John. Thank you. All right, well, thank you for a great presentation. Thanks for all your hard work, and here we go.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Thank you. All right, we're going to go ahead and close 6A1, and we'll move now to 6A2, Manager Thomas.

Thank you. We are joined this morning by Abby Pike, who is our Extension County Coordinator. She is here to present the fiscal year 27 budget for the University of Nevada Cooperative Extension.

All right, thank you. Good morning. Welcome. Great. It's good to see you all. Good morning, chair and commissioners. For the record, my name is Abby Pike. I'm the Extension County Coordinator for Washoe County here today representing the University of Nevada Cooperative Extension. I do not have a presentation today. I will be referencing the memo that's in the agenda. So please refer to that for more details. Just as a bit of background information, Extension is a partnership between the federal, state, and county governments that brings the resources, knowledge, and research from the land grant universities to the populations around them. And here in Washoe County, we're connected with the University of Nevada, Reno. You may know Extension from a few of our programs, such as 4-H Youth Development, Master Gardeners, Nevada Radon Education Program, Weed Warriors, Health and Nutrition, and our Community Development Program, which works with Washoe County to deliver the Washoe County Leadership Academy. I am here today to fulfill our requirement per the Nevada revised statutes to present what we will be doing with the county funds that we receive from Washoe County. So as you can see on the memo, the vast majority of the revenue that we are receiving from Washoe County is going to personnel. Over 90% of the revenue from Washoe County is going to that budget. So I will spend most of the time today talking through what that looks like. The people that we fund through extension, they are the ones who are going into classrooms, community centers and gathering sites across the county to deliver these important educational resources. And it also funds the administrative staff that support them and ensure that we can secure new funding from federal grants and gifts and to make sure that we are doing our reporting and administering our programs appropriately. So I want to talk through a few of the changes that are happening this year with our personnel. A lot of it is staying similar with our consistent programs we've been running for 10, 20, 100 years, like 4-H youth development. The only new program that we are implementing or hoping to implement this year is the workforce development program that President Sandoval introduced when we had the UNR Day at Washoe County. Oh, do I need to pause?

I think you can keep on going. We'll work through it.

Okay. Okay, sure. Hello, thank you. All right, we hear you. Great. So this program, it will use a real-time workforce development software program. Along with curriculum for skill development, we're hoping to be working on interest and skill development exploration for high school students who are looking at what career they will pursue in their future. And this software, it will take a quiz to identify their skills and how that aligns with real-time jobs available in their community now and the pathways that are available to get there. So it's not just about going to a four-year degree program, but it will have information on all sorts of industry certifications, online programs that are available, and of course, all the educational programs from all of the NSHE institutions in Nevada. THIS PROGRAM, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING FOR OVER TWO YEARS WITH INDUSTRY LEADERS, WITH OUR STATE PARTNERS TO SEE HOW EXTENSION CAN MOST EFFECTIVELY HELP WITH THIS CHALLENGE. IN THE 2024 NEVADA JOB SEEKER SURVEY, WHICH REALLY STARTED THIS CONVERSATION, THEY FOUND THAT 38% OF WASHOE RESIDENTS IDENTIFIED THE CHALLENGE OF OBTAINING NECESSARY TRAINING AND CREDENTIALS AS THEIR PRIMARY BARRIER TO FINDING AND KEEPING A GOOD JOB. This program is hoping to start with high school students to improve that and then ideally expand to different age groups to meet their needs. We are hoping to hire one faculty member to lead this program in Washoe County and one community-based instructor to be going into the classrooms and delivering this education. And of course, this is just a launching point with county funds. We hope that we will get industry buy-in and be able to partner with other counties in the nearby area that are also experiencing rapid workforce transformations to make this program sustainable in the long term. Other than that, as you have heard a lot over the last year, I'm sure, we had our SNAP-Ed funding terminated. We were able to use rollover funds in the last fiscal year to continue health and nutrition education, but that has officially come to a close. We were able to use funding from the county to support one full-time program officer and one part-time community-based instructor to continue delivering health and nutrition education here in Washoe County. It's not based on SNAP-Ed and that curriculum will no longer be updated as federal nutrition guidelines change. So we're working with our extension faculty members here in Nevada and across the country to make sure that we are still delivering the most up-to-date research-based health and nutrition education. Other than that, our Living with Fire program has also experienced changes in federal funding as the BLM and the New Wildland Firefighting Federal Agency is adopting. So to ensure that they are still able to meet their objectives of educating Washoe County residents on adapting to living with wildfire and preparing for emergencies like that, we're supporting one full-time faculty member on Washoe County funds for this year. They had a five-year contract, but it changed partway through, so this is a bridge fund for this fiscal year to make sure that that faculty member is able to continue their K-12 wildland firefighting education and curriculum development, and to continue to work with Washoe County to develop the community wildfire protection plan. And then we have two faculty members that we are supporting 20% of their full-time equivalent positions to make sure that they can continue going out into the community to provide community education, to provide resources proactively, and to go to events that were requested at. Their funding was changing, so they wouldn't be able to do as much community education. And of course, living with fire, it's very critical that they are able to connect with our community directly. That's an overview of what is changing with our personnel. Other than that, I just wanna highlight in our contingency funds, we do have 200,000 set aside for bridge funding. Last year, we had 500,000 and a lot of that was appropriated to the programs I've already discussed to make sure that they can continue to provide education. And one of those was the early childhood education program, which I know Commissioner Hill, you addressed last time as critical for our community. That, we are having challenges trying to figure out how to move forward with that because we don't have funding anticipated in the future. So because bridge funding is to get them to the next grant that's supposed to be available, we're still working with them to try to figure out how we can continue implementing that. And I may follow up if there are any philanthropic connections. I'm sure we will be reaching out soon. And beyond that I just want to highlight we know that we're not the only people who are experiencing funding challenges so we're working with our with our partners with our state and county agencies with our nonprofits and with our educational institutions to see what needs are emerging and what gaps are arising from these funding changes and we want to make sure that we are all using our resources as effectively and efficiently as possible so that's A lot of what I'm working on is making sure that people know what we're doing and finding out what is happening in the community and where the needs are the most significant. I think that's all for me today. Is there any questions or anything you want me to go into more detail on?

Thanks for your presentation. And I'll just add very quickly that NACO has actually stood up a committee specifically for all 17 counties to participate and looking at what those particular gaps are. And I'm on that committee. So I'm sure that I know that this is Washoe, but still I think it's important that everybody understand the commitment throughout the entire state to the UNR extension.

I appreciate that.

Yeah, of course. It'll be interesting to see how that committee goes. It was very robust. Wasn't at that meeting. Yeah. All right. I'll open it up to questions. Commissioner Hill, do you have anything? Vice chair Garcia, commissioner Herman, do you have anything? Is Commissioner Herman still with us?

Can you read me?

We can hear you. All right.

It's a little tricky on this phone. So thank you so much. We really love working with you guys and the 4-H and the fair went well and all that. And I want to thank you for all your hard work. It's a great program. And I hope we can find you some money.

I appreciate that. Thank you. Yes, we all had a great time at the state fair.

Yeah, we did. Thank you. Thank you so much, Ms. Pike.

Appreciate it.

All right, we're going to go ahead and close item six and move to item seven. We do have a request by Commissioner Herman to pull item seven, F1. I'm going to honor that request. I will entertain a motion. Madam Chair, I have a disclosure. Well, would you like to offer a disclosure? Yes, I do.

Please do. On 74, I attend the Lutheran Church of the Good Shepherd. This donation from the endowment fund, I was not on that commission. COMMITTEE. I HAVE NO PECUNIARY INTEREST ON THIS DONATION, BUT I DID WANT TO DISCLOSE THAT I PERSONALLY ATTEND THAT CONGREGATION. SO THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. OF COURSE. THANK YOU.

MADAM CHAIR, I'D ALSO LIKE TO MAKE A DISCLOSURE ON ITEM 7D1. THIS IS RELATED TO THE UNR STREET REACH PROGRAM. I'M AN EMPLOYEE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA RENO. I AM NOT INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT AND I HAVE NO PICURINARY INTEREST. WITH THAT I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT MINUS THE ONE THAT COMMISSIONER HERMAN REQUESTED.

SECOND. 7F1 IS WHAT WE'RE PULLING. MANAGER THOMAS, DO YOU WANT TO READ INTO THE RECORD AND THEN I'LL CIRCLE BACK WITH THE MOTION AND THE SECOND AND THEN ANY DISCUSSION AND THEN PUBLIC COMMENTS. SO WE ARE ROCKING AND ROLLING BUT LET'S JUST BACK UP FOR ONE SECOND. Actually, why don't we hold off on 7F1 for the record? So we're pulling that. Is there any public comment?

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

Okay, thank you. So we are looking at the motion then of Vice Chair Garcia with 7A1 through 7E4. And we have a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. We'll now move to 7F1.

Thank you, Manager Thomas. Thank you. 7F1 is a recommendation to approve a two-year interlocal agreement between Washoe County and the Nevada Secretary of State, outlining the duties and obligations of each party for ongoing maintenance of the voter registration and election management system, known as VRAMs, implemented pursuant to state law. The agreement requires the county to contribute a share cost of the no-ink total vote election management system in the amount of $238,000 for fiscal year 27 and 28, at $119,000 per fiscal year. And if this item is approved, it authorizes the Division Director of Purchasing and Contracts to execute the agreement. If I may, this is obviously the authorization for the county to pay our share of the state's top-down system, of which all counties are utilizing. And this replaces our legacy system DIMS, which we were using, which was the in-house unsupported system. So if there's any ambiguity about what this item is, we have Registrar McDonald here to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you.

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

Penny Brock.

Penny Brock, for the record, thank you for pulling this to be heard. My story about this no-wink system started in the general election of 24. I knew it was coming. I did not recall that it had been approved by the county commissioners. So when I got there, there was tables set up and you had to sit down before we just walk up and sign a paper log book. I'm going, well, this is going to take a while. And sure enough, it did. Many vote centers had backups because of this no-wink system. system. So you were to advance from screen to screen. I could not identify two numbers I was supposed to certify were correct. So I said, I cannot advance. She goes, then you can't vote. Then you can't vote. And because I did not know what that was, and it's like under what penalty of perjury? So I did not advance it, and I did not get to vote. This year, I again went in person and I confirmed what those two numbers were for, so there's no issue. So then, after I advanced it and she asked to see my driver's license, which is fine, I think we should show a picture ID when we vote. I hand her my driver's license. She doesn't give it back to me. She starts to put it in to this electronic e-pull book. I said, I do not want my driver's license scanned in. I do not approve that. Again, she goes, then you can't vote. Then you can't vote. Well, we've got a couple issues going on here. First of all, the people that use the mail-in ballot, they do not have to enclose a picture of their driver's license. So that's discrimination. for those that vote in person. But then I heard of a woman who did not want to use this e-pull book because she didn't want her information scanned into the cloud. And that is a concern. So again, she was denied the right to vote. One of the people that sat in the observation booth with me, they went to vote in person at public market on election day. They did everything and he said, now don't you want to see our driver's license? And he was told no. No, he didn't have to show his driver's license. So again, I was discriminated against at least three times. Now I've got an article here put out by the Election Integrity Network who has written a nine page paper on why Dominion plus a no wink equals disaster. With this system, there are threats to ballot secrecy, transparency, and security. What could possibly go wrong? Again, this is gonna cost taxpayers millions of dollars. I already heard him in that presentation he did. He wants more money for more equipment. Thank you. Thank you.

There's nobody else signed in.

Thank you. Does anyone have any questions? Commissioner Herman, would you like any clarification on this item based on your request to have a poll?

Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Oh, that's tricky. All right. I don't have any comments. I just... I tend to agree with the problems that people have had and because of these problems pertaining to this item. So I just feel that I'll let you proceed how you need to proceed.

Okay, thanks. I don't know if there's any other questions or need for clarification on this particular item. There's no other public comment. Okay, I'm going to go ahead and ask for a motion at this time, please.

So moved, Madam Chair.

We have a motion by Commissioner Hill. Do we have a second? Second. Second by Vice Chair Garcia. Any other discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Nay. Aye. Motion carries three to one. Thank you so much, appreciate it. We're gonna go ahead and move now. Again, just as a reminder, we're moving the block after item 10, so we're gonna move to item eight. You know what I think, can we take a five minute break? Can we take a five minute break? Well, within reason. I am a consensus person, so if someone really doesn't want to take a break, I suppose I can override that, but I do believe in consensus and fairness and being equitable. But I'll go ahead and follow your lead manager, Thomas. We're going to take a break at 1138 for five minutes. Thanks. All right, I'm going to call this meeting back to order at 1146. And just to establish clarity, we have Commissioner Herman and Commissioner Garcia both on the line. So we still have a quorum.

Can we get a verbal on that from them?

Well, I'm going to if I could. Just I'm trying. I'll do faster. Commissioner Herman, would you be so kind to let us know that you hear us?

Can you hear me?

Yes. Then I hear you. Yay. Commissioner or Vice Chair Garcia, can you hear us? Yes, I can. Thank you so much. All right. We are going to move to item eight.

manager thomas thank you there's two parts to this so feel bear with me item eight is a recommendation to one approve the appointment of one candidate to the washoe county planning commission which is representing commission district one which generally includes incline village in crystal bay most of the forest area along the west side of mount rose highway and portions of the southwest truckee meadows area this would serve a full term beginning on the date of appointment and ending on June 30, 2030, or until such time as the candidate is no longer serving on the Planning Commission or a successor is appointed, whichever occurs first. There are two applicants listed. One is eligible, one is ineligible. And then two, we're approving the appointment of one candidate to the Washoe County Planning Commission representing the at-large seat north of the river, which includes areas of unincorporated county north of the Truckee River, to serve a full term beginning on the date of appointment and ending on June 30th, 2030 until such a time as the candidate no longer serves or successor is appointed, whichever occurs first. We have six eligible and two ineligible in that category. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. DD, Ms. Gustafson, may I ask you a question? Is it okay if we go ahead and take these as two separate motions? I would recommend that. I think that's a great recommendation. Thank you for confirming that recommendation. So I am going to handle them as two separate items, if you will, even though they're in item eight. So I'm going to actually call essentially for even two public comments, if that's okay. Is that okay? Okay, great. So since we have what I'm gonna call item eight one, which is just one candidate and one was ineligible, I don't know if you'd like to add anything to the process. Okay. I don't think a ballot is necessary unless you'd like one. Okay. So we'll just go ahead and ask for public comment at this time for that item, please.

First up, we have Wendy Leonard followed by Catherine Yarte. Okay. Same. And then Don Christensen. Yeah, this is the first one, Mr. Christensen. Okay, that answered that question. We will call them for item two. Thank you so much.

So hearing no public comment, I'll go ahead and essentially ask for a motion for the...

a vacancy that has daniel and i may be pronouncing his last name incorrectly i'll go with that lazarechi thank you mr lazarechi i i move to approve um uh mr lazarechi to this um the uh planning commission representing commission district one thank you

All right, we have a motion by Commissioner Hill, a second by Commissioner, is that Herman? Yes, it is. Thank you so much. Any further discussion? Hearing none, I'll call for the vote. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you so much. So we'll now move to item 8.2. Do you want... to go ahead and give us a little bit of background on this.

Sure. Alexandra Wilson, for the record. So for this appointment, it affects four out of the five districts. So you do have six candidates in front of you that are eligible for appointment. After public comment, we will ask to bring over the ballots. Will you select your top two individuals for that one opening? Thank you.

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

Up first, Wendy Leonard, followed by Catherine Yarte.

Thank you very much. Wendy Leonard, I'm here to speak to you regarding the potential appointment to the Planning Commission. I'd like to start with Mr. Pierce's request to be put on the Planning Commission. I'm certain that you know, or if you don't, you'll research this, that NRS 278.040 would not allow him to sit as a commissioner as well as sitting on the Planning Commission. You can't sit on an appellate board. And so I believe that Mr. Pierce's request is motivated due to self-interest rather than consistency within the county. And what I would like to see out of the commission is appoint somebody who can be consistent moving forward and I'd like you to allow him to focus more on his campaign. He's very likely to be sitting as a county commissioner very soon, and I would hope that you would appoint somebody who doesn't have political interest outside of that commission. It's important to me to ensure that all of the needs and all of the recommendations of the public as well as the county are met on this commission. And what that means to me is taking into consideration not just Nevada Advice Statute and Washoe County Code, but what the public wants and what they need. And what that means is that we would not want to fall under what Las Vegas fell under in 2024 with a $286 million settlement because the commission and the board continued to deny requests for development, which resulted in a Supreme Court ruling against the board, resulting in the citizens having to pay out $286 million. That's significant. If you don't have somebody on these commissions who can look at laws, rules, and regulations and act within those, rather than in political interests, it can be harmful to the county. So I would ask that you consider me based on my history, my experience in looking at reviewing rules, laws, regulations, and figuring out how to apply those, as well as looking at case law and how that may apply to issues in front of the commission. Although I don't know all of the Washoe County Code Chapter 110, it's 1,236 pages. What I do know is I know how to look into those codes and how to apply those codes based on the issues before the Planning Commission, as well as that NRS 278 that dictates the rulings and the recommendations of the Planning Commission to this commission. It's very important that you have somebody that can actually read into those, apply those, and be a voice of reason for the commission. Thank you very much for your time today and for everything you do.

Thank you.

Good morning. I'm checking the time to make sure I can still say good morning.

My name is Catherine Yarte, and I'm asking for your support for my appointment to the at-large north of the river seat for the Washoe County Planning Commission. I have lived in Washoe County since 1986, and since 2016, I have lived and operated my business in Rancho Haven in the North Valleys area of unincorporated Washoe County. I've been showing up at this dais and others for years, not just as a business owner, but as a community member who has a stake in how these decisions get made. When you look at the applicants before you today, I want to highlight something I think matters for this appointment in particular. Among this group, I am the only applicant who has been regularly attending the Planning Commission meetings, Board of County Commissioner meetings, CAB meetings, and more. actively engaging with the county process and apart from Mr. Pierce who has currently served on this and other boards. I respect that experience and I thank him greatly for his service. I do agree with Ms. Leonard that because he's currently running for the county commission seat that that may create a conflict further down the road and I do point out as a previous candidate I did not actually apply for this until after the election because I did not want that conflict. I bring a sustained ground level engagement along with a fresh perspective and someone who's been watching this process closely, learning it from the outside in, and recently achieving real results within it. I believe that a combination of active involvement and fresh eyes is something this commission can put to good use. My 13 year career in preclinical research trained me how to review complex technical material carefully, ask precise questions, and evaluate evidence before reaching conclusions. Those skills translate directly in reviewing land use and development applications. I've developed the habit of gathering input from multiple sources before decisions are made, whether that's county staff, affected residents, or technical experts. I've been meeting with developer consultants to understand better their perspectives, as well as residents of the neighborhoods that are being directly affected by the planning. A planning commission makes better decisions when every member comes to the table prepared, and that's a standard I hold myself to. My work as a member of the Rancho Haven Property Owners Association has required me to bring people with competing interests to a shared understanding and a shared outcome while ensuring community members' thoughts, concerns, and opinions are heard and received. That skill is exactly what a cohesive board needs, members who can listen carefully, weigh the full picture, and move forward together even on difficult decisions. As co-owner of Team Yarte Horsemanship and founder and president of the Nevada Equine Council, I've spent nearly three years navigating Washoe County's equine business code in its current state and participating in the amendment process championed and led by Commission Chair Andriola. That effort led to a unanimous vote and approval by the Planning Commission just last week on July 7th. That recent success represents years of sustained engagement, collaboration with planning staff, and a willingness to keep working even when the progress was slow. This is exactly how I will approach this commission seat. Earlier this year, I also spoke before the Planning Commission about a gap in our development code related to road improvement timelines where approvals were moving forward based on infrastructure schedules that could shift before construction was complete. That's the kind of issue I'll keep watching for, places where the process works on paper but falls short for the people already living here.

Thank you. Dawn Christensen.

Good morning. It's almost noon. Madam Chair and members of the Commission. I'm kind of torn in reaffirming my application to the Planning Commission for the at-large district. I have worked with Rob Pierce extensively over the last six years. I was his vice chair on the CAB, or not CAB, but the, forgive me.

Board of Adjustment.

Thank you, the BOA, Board of Adjustment. And during that time, again, I'm torn because I don't like the idea of running against Rob. I endorse him 100%. However, I'd I'd be remiss if I didn't put my hat in the ring. My experience on both the CAB at Spanish Springs and, of course, for the Board of Adjustment has given me a unique opportunity to learn procedures, the codes, the ethics, everything involved with this position. And I would serve diligently. I had an exemplary voting record and attendance record for the Board of Adjustment for those four years that I was on there. And I take it seriously. I have attended many meetings silently of the Planning Commission, as it might be inappropriate for a member of the BOA TO SPEAK TO ISSUES THAT I MIGHT HAVE TO HEAR LATER. SO, YES, I'M QUITE FAMILIAR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ITS PROCEDURES AND ITS PHILOSOPHY. AND I WOULD ADHERE, OF COURSE, TO THE LAW. I LOOK FORWARD TO PERHAPS BEING APPOINTED TODAY. I love Washoe County. I've been here for almost 50 years. And I love it. And I love the people here. I'm well regarded in my neighborhood as someone who has ethics, integrity, and a caring attitude about issues that would come before the Planning Commission. And I, again, appreciate this opportunity to speak to you folks. Thanks.

Thank you.

There's nobody else signed in.

Thank you so much. All right. Ms. Wilson.

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

Thank you. Madam Chair, may I make a quick little statement?

You can make a long statement if you'd like.

I typically vote for the incumbent, and especially if they're showing up, doing a good job, engaged, doing the homework, all of that. And I certainly believe that the incumbent in this seat has been doing that. I just want to make it clear why I will not be voting for the incumbent. I think that Mr. Pierce running for office And being a planning commissioner just makes me feel uncomfortable. I have to be honest. I think that this is a great opportunity to ensure that we have folks that don't necessarily have that conflict. And I really appreciate his service. appreciate that i know he's put in so much work on this board on the boa on the cab um very engaged in the community which is why he's running for commissioner so um that that's why i am not voting for the incumbent i just wanted to be clear about that madam chair thank you thank you and i don't want to have um

Ms. Gustafson also say anything about me talking outside of the agenda item, but I think that there'll be opportunities for us to have a discussion as a whole later with these kinds of possible conflicts where you're running for office and you're holding a seat, especially those that are in quasi-judicial roles. But I am kind of leading that charge, and Ms. Gustafson knows that, so I'll be working with Ms. Gustafson at a later time to bring something maybe to the board. So having said that, we have a ballot you're wanting us to choose to. We certainly have two Commissioner Vice Chair Garcia and Commissioner Herman that are on the line. So how would you like us to do that?

It would be best once we tally the votes in person to ask online who they would like to cast for their talk. Great. Thank you. Absolutely.

Round one, Commissioner Hill.

Jen Gustafson, for the record, real quick. As a matter of procedure, I think it would be better to start with the people on the line so that their votes are not potentially influenced by the votes that are read.

I think that's a great suggestion. That was a great suggestion. So I'm just going to ask Vice Chair Garcia if you would share with us your two names, please.

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

Okay. And Commissioner Herman.

Catherine Yarte and Don Christensen.

Great. Thank you.

We have marked those votes, so let's proceed. Commissioner Hill, Don Christensen, and Wendy Leonard, and Chair Andriola, Sarah, I can't say her last name, and Wendy Leonard. Thank you.

Thank you. Well, it looks like we have three votes for Ms. Leonard. And I will, do we need that in the form of a motion?

I move to appoint Ms. Leonard to the at-large North of the River Planning Commission seat, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Second. Vice Chair Garcia, was that a second? Yes, Madam Chair. Okay, thank you so much. So we have a motion and a second for Ms. Wendy Leonard. Any other discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? nay all right we have a motion three to one for miss leonard congratulations and thanks to everyone who applied it was um always difficult making the decisions but we appreciate you putting in your time and hopefully you'll be doing that again so thank you is there anything else on that item i think that closes item eight We'll open item nine.

Manager Thomas. Thank you. Item nine is a recommendation to appoint one candidate from a pool of 23 applicants that are listed on the agenda. This is to fill one midterm vacancy on the Washoe County Library Board of Trustees pursuant to state law beginning August 1st, 2026 and ending on June 30th, 2027. And we have Ms. Wilson with us again.

Hi again, Alexandra Wilson for the record. Just to give some background on this item, at the previous meeting, we had voted on two candidates for the Library Board of Trustees where we had 25 applicants. Of course, because two individuals were appointed, now we're down to the 23, and we're able to use the list that we have in front of us today. And so similar to the previous appointment, you'll select your top two individuals for this one vacancy.

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

Greetings, Board. My name is Sean Sullivan, for the record. You all heard from me once recently. I made my resume pitch a few meetings ago, one before the selection was made. And at that meeting, I was hoping to give you my priorities and my platform pitch. So that's what we're going to do today. I didn't quite make it back from luncheon time, but hey, such is life. So I'm grateful that I'm getting a second chance here. Um, one of the big issues, as we all know, was ethics. And, uh, that has been partially, uh, somewhat dealt, I mean, dealt with or, or whatever, I guess, uh, maybe she dealt with it herself. Doesn't matter. Not my business. Anyways, my focus would be on preventing similar issues in the future. I would advocate to hold myself accountable, make the commitment to the NRS that the bylaws call out more, have some teeth, really. There's currently no consequence for violating the NRS codes that are called out in the bylaws, and that doesn't really make any sense if it's just the honor system, and we saw some examples of those results. the other issues i'd be working on are uh restoring the hours uh this requires diving into the budget i know uh miss mcclure is already doing this quite thoroughly and uh working with her would be a priority i've met her in person at the 60th anniversary uh celebration So I think we'd be able to work together, no problem. And the other issue also connected to the budget is the 10% acquisitions rule. We'd like to get that back up to 10%. I believe it's connected to funding. So that is a critical issue. I do like Ms. McClure's data-driven approach. I think we'd work well together. As I mentioned, I'm an engineer, so... Data is kind of my bread and butter, and I agree with some of the comments that collaborating with schools is important. The activities offered, we went to a dinosaur painting and dinosaur-themed activity recently, and it was super fun. Tons of kids. This is a great marketing opportunity with schools. Cards for all students seems like a good idea. Would want to look into the details of how that would work and everything there. I have a record of being at the library board of trustee meetings. I do not have a record of being at the library because I try not to sign up for things online for security reasons, but I have been going. It was mentioned that these trustees should get training, certainly support that. and yeah, I would be happy to lend my time and any knowledge I can offer to the Library Board of Trustees. Furthermore, if I get the job, I will expedite my plans to get a haircut. Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other? Sorry, that's everybody in chambers.

Okay, great. So, Ms. Wilson?

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

Thank you. Thank you. Okay, I am going to call Vice Chair Garcia, would you be so kind?

Yes, Madam Chair. My votes go to Elizabeth and Lizette.

Hold on. Elizabeth. Oh, Gomez. Is that Lizeth Gomez? Is that who you're saying?

Elizabeth Cadigan and Lizeth Lechuga Gomez.

Okay. So Elizabeth Padigan and Gomez. Is that correct, Vice Chair? Yes. Thank you. Commissioner Herman.

Earl Rabbit and Denise Meyer.

Okay.

Okay. So our results for Chair Andriola, Billy James Moten and Karen Hayes. And for Commissioner Hill, Donna Dawson-Schwartz and Kathleen Hollingsworth.

See, I think number five, we've gone five rounds.

Could you repeat what the chair voted for, please?

I voted for Hayes and Moten, Karen Hayes and Billy James Moten. Any other clarification by any of the commissioners? Because we are now going to move to round two.

Thank you.

Okay. Vice Chair Garcia.

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

Okay, great. Commissioner Herman.

I'll add James Moten and Earl Rabbit then.

Okay. Thank you. Okay.

Okay. The results for Chair Andriola, Billy James Moten, and Karen Hayes, and Commissioner Hill, Elizabeth Cadigan, and Liz F. Lechuga-Gomez. Okay.

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

So are we narrowing it down now to which candidates?

We don't have any that made a majority. We're in round three.

Okay, we can't take the top. We had two votes for Elizabeth Cadigan and two votes for Elizabeth LeChoubet-Gomez.

We do, but we also have two. Do you want to take Padigan and Moten? Yeah, I mean, put them in there. That's what we can do. We can take Padigan and Moten then.

Yeah.

But we're still in round three.

And for the record, there's also two votes for Billy as well. Yeah. So we're down to three candidates.

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

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

Okay, great. So what are you wanting us to do, Ms. Wilson?

From this list of individuals, it might be best to select your top individual.

That's what I was thinking you were going to say, just wanting to make sure. What? Vice J Garcia.

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

Okay. Commissioner Herman, a Billy James Moten. Thank you.

Okay. Chair Andreola selected Billy James Moten. Commissioner Hill selected Elizabeth Cadigan.

Round four. So we have two candidates, just for the record, just making sure that everybody's clear. Padigan and Moten. Okay.

Vice Chair Garcia. Elizabeth Cadigan, please.

Thank you. Commissioner Herman.

Billy James Moten.

Thank you. Results for Chair Andriola, Billy James Moten, and Commissioner Hill, Elizabeth Cadigan. Or Cadigan. Cadigan. Cadigan.

Well, this is like deja vu for me because I'm the one who broke it last time. And we could just keep on going on and on. But we do need to go. So we are down to Pat again and Moten again. You're wanting us to select one? Yes, that's correct. Okay. I have been writing down the wrong name the whole time. I thought it was Pat again. It's Kat again. That's funny, but not funny. Thank you. All right. Vice Chair Garcia, please.

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

Thank you. And for the record, it's Cadigan. I had been saying Padigan, and I apologize for that. Commissioner Herman. Billy James Smolton. Thank you.

Okay. Chair Andriola selected Elizabeth Cadigan, and Commissioner Hill selected Elizabeth Cadigan.

So what do we have? Was that five rounds?

Five rounds.

And so am I hearing a motion for Elizabeth Cadigan? Move to make a motion. From Vice Chair Garcia, we have a motion for Elizabeth Cadigan. We have a second by Commissioner Hill. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you so much. Thanks for all your hard work on that. And maybe when the time is right, we can... Do it again. Great vibe. All right, we're gonna close item number nine. Congratulations to both eight and nine candidates and for all those that have been serving and applying and appreciate it. We'll move now to item number 10, Manager Thomas.

Thank you, Madam Chair. This is a recommendation to consider an easement purchase and sale agreement between Washoe County and Dandini Spectrum Holdings LLC, which is a Delaware Limited Liability Corporation, for design, construction, installation, use, and maintenance of a requested emergency access road, including relocation of an existing public utility easement and associated improvements over, across, and through a portion of Washoe County property, Assessor Parcel Number 520-250-31. This is located at the terminus of Spectrum Boulevard, Reno, at a cost of $650,000. The easement request would provide for emergency ingress and egress to the adjacent city of Reno approved residential development. And if approved, this item authorizes the county manager to execute all the necessary documents. We're joined this morning by ACM Solero. He's going to provide a brief overview and introduce the grantee. Thank you.

Good morning. For the record, Dave Solaro, Assistant County Manager. Just a couple of quick items. In the agenda item, there are a couple of numbers transposed. I want to put that on the record. So the actual APN is 502-25031. And the address is 5190, not 5100. I'm just going to point that out. My apologies for that. I have had this on the agenda about three different times with the exact same numbers on it, and I did not catch it until someone pointed it out to me. Oh, it wasn't even me. Someone else.

Oh, a good catch to whoever it was.

Board, as you'll remember, this item has had a fairly lengthy history with this board. A developer came to us in 2023 saying, That was the first time it came before this board for action and the board gave direction to staff to see if we could negotiate an agreement for an easement across our property. So I'll remind the board that this is a request for an easement of a water line and an emergency access across Washoe County owned property. This property houses our emergency operations center as well as the regional training facility for the region. It is not a decision on the development project. I think there's been some confusion in the past. Bless you. The City of Reno actually has the City of Reno Planning Commission and the City of Reno Council have the authority over property zoning. So this has nothing to do with the zoning of the property or the request of the apartment complex next door. This is specific for a requested easement across Washoe County-owned property. Again, the Board of County Commissioners gave direction in August of 23 to negotiate an easement. Washer County staff, the district attorney's office took quite a bit of time working with the applicant to work through a bunch of things. As you'll recall, in August of 23, there were quite a few promises that were made and a few other things we're trying to make sure that we could capture as best we could in any agreement. Anything that was legally available for us to capture in such an agreement. What you have before you is that agreement. It did appear on the agenda a couple of times for the Board of County Commissioners. However, at the last minute, the applicant actually requested to pull those. So that's the gap of time between 23 and now where we are here in 2026. Again, the Public Safety Training Center, quite a large piece of property. On the right-hand side here is the easement area, the area in red. Parts of it are existing paved access locations currently within the training center property. The area in blue is undeveloped area that then goes up and ties into Rager Road, I believe is the right terminology for the road. So this would be a second means of egress for the approved development within the City of Reno along Specter Boulevard, only utilized during an emergency Secondarily, there's a waterline easement that is necessary underneath this roadway. The area in green on the easement area on the right is a blanket area or a blanket easement currently underlying the entire portion of the training center for public utility easements. A little bit of history on that. When Washoe County purchased this property, we actually only purchased the area in green to begin with. And so the owner at the time had a blanket easement for utilities across that property to the property to the north. As you can see on the left, Washoe County actually purchased the entire property, and that's what's in the blue. So that green area is a portion of property that has an underlying public utility easement. And so you may hear that from the applicant. I just wanted to make sure that it was understood that The reason it's only a portion of that and not the entire thing is because Washoe County bought this in two separate pieces when we developed the property. So, again, the city of Reno has the zoning on the properties. This is not about zoning and the approval of apartment complexes. What this is is, you know, you as the property owner need to make the determination based on the information provided in the staff report. whether this access and waterline inhibit existing or future use of the property, and whether the agreement is appropriate for the needs of the Board of County Commissioners. With that, I'm available for questions, but we also have Kevin Grant, who's owner of the property, here to provide some information to you as well. So I will hold off on any questions that you may have until you've heard from Mr. Grant.

Thank you.

Good morning, commissioners. My name is Kevin Grant. Just for the record, I saw you in April. And I'm really here for questions. I can go through the deck. You've had it. You've seen it. It's a big project. It's 420 units. Last time we priced it out, it's a $120 million project. We've been at this for about six years. I don't build junkie projects. I build very nice places. I don't do a lot. I'm not a developer. I'm a landowner. I'll do a project like this maybe once every five years. I tend to develop to keep. What that means is I put amenities into the projects that are really nice, things that I'm going to live with, and I'm going to hear all the complaints because I show up at the ribbon cutting and we take care of our tenants. So we can go through this deck if you'd like, but I'd just like you to know that background. I'm the guy, I told you this in April, I'm the guy that brought in the equity partner in Boston. And there are three equity partners in this. They're prepared to put in more equity capital and then seek out the bank financing to basically get us to $120 million. It's a substantial project. We don't take this lightly. The equity partner in Boston, they're not doing a lot of real estate right now. Construction costs have gone way up. Cost of capital has gone way up. And, you know, there's a lot of need for housing. So this is a project that's sort of bubbled up to the top, looking at projects across the country. So we're very committed to it. Mr. Solaro is giving you the lay of the land of, you know, where we sit. And as you mentioned, this has already been approved by the city. All we really need is emergency egress to satisfy the safety requirements. And, of course, we need water access. And there's plenty of water around. This particular easement is the most reliable way because it's gravity-fed. We don't like to have pumps, but if that's what we need to do, we can do that. There's a, well, that's technicality. We will give up the easement that we currently have over your property. Now, we have no use for this easement, really, honestly, just as a negotiating thing. But down the road, this is an encumbrance on your property. 50 years from now, the county may decide to do something else with the property and to have this hanging over your head. It's a really good thing to get rid of. So we're happy to basically do an easement swap, if you will. There's been a lot of work on this that's been done in the past, and people have tried to take a shot at calculating the benefits to the county. But remember, this is 420 units. It's commercial property. It will be taxed as commercial property. It's an apartment facility. We had a municipal finance banker price out or do the math on what he thought the property tax revenue would be. and then ultimately work into you can't really see this, but work into the ability to bond it. So if you have a stream of property tax revenue, then if you've got other projects that you want to do in the county, you can issue bonds against this. And we used or the banker used a rate of four and a half percent. So you could you could probably bond the property tax on this and generate probably around 75 million of bond revenue. That's if you choose to do that down the road once the property's stabilized. There's been some discussion about noise. We actually commissioned a noise study, put a bunch of microphones around. I've actually been up at the property a bunch. The noise would not scare my dog. And my dog is very timid. And be that as may, the noise study informed us that really it's the highway noise that's really the noise. And we can mitigate that. This is a well-trodden path with construction companies. And triple-pane glass and there are all sorts of construction materials that can be used to deal with any noise issues. So, we're going to be ahead of the curve on that. I'm not going to bore you with all the press about housing shortages across the country. This is a national story. You know the story. You know it as well as anybody. I will just point out that we can do 200 units as it stands without this easement. The problem is that the site costs are really high on this piece of land. And with 420 units on a per unit basis, the the cost of just dealing with the dirt and getting it all, all the infrastructure set up properly is about $30,000 a unit. If we're just at 200 units, then it's $60,000 a unit. And that translates into about $300 a month in higher rent. That's the last thing we want to do. I like not raising rents. I hate raising rents. Like I said, I, I developed a keep, and the last thing you want to do as the property owner long-term is to raise rents. But honestly, it's the last thing I want to do. Sometimes it's necessary because simply the expenses go up. So once again, that's my spiel. I am happy to take any questions. Now, keep in mind, I'm not a developer. I'm the property owner. I hire developers. I hire construction companies. I hire engineers to help me understand. So I'll answer anything that I possibly can, given that background.

Madam Chair, if I might. Sure. I know we were notified that Vice Chair Garcia needed to leave the meeting, so for the purposes of the record, she dropped at 1230. Okay. We still have a quorum.

Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Thanks. Thank you for coming again, and thanks for the first time that you came and kind of laid a little bit of groundwork on where things were at. So I'll go ahead and open up questions for either Mr. Solero or you, Mr. Grant. I'm going to go to Commissioner. May I go to Commissioner Herman first? Commissioner Herman, do you have any questions? I don't.

I've been following in this project for quite a few years, and if this is what they need to finish up, I will be in favor of it. Thank you, Commissioner Herman.

Commissioner Hill. Just to Mr. Solero, the question on the easement and just could you clarify again the existing easement that the developer has over the county property?

Sure. So there's an existing blanket easement. And maybe what I'll do is I'll just go back on this. So our entire our entire parcel is outlined in the dark black all the way around this sign here the exhibit here the area shaded in gray is an existing blanket utility easement underneath underlying the property portion of the property it's not the entire property. It was originally set up to benefit the property to the north that is not shaded here as a way to make sure that development could occur along that property when the parcels were initially sold. The way I read the easement documents and everything else, they were for the benefit of the underlying property owner. It happens to be the same property owner that owned the property. I'm not so sure if Mr. Grant was the original property owner of the entire thing or not. but the original property owner that all of those spectrum parcels were created from. And so Washoe County actually purchased the property to the north, in my mind, the benefiting property. I suppose there are some properties even further north of that that could request an easement through this portion of the property. Then they would also need to do what Mr. Grant is requesting here, is get an additional easement through Washoe County-owned property that is not encumbered by that easement. I don't know if I'm being clear to answer your question or not, but a portion of the property that Washoe County sits on is encumbered by a blanket public utility easement, essentially meaning that someone could put a public utility anywhere across there.

Underground.

Underground, correct. The question then becomes, well, if you get to the edge of that easement, then what? You also need an easement to extend past that across the property that does not exist. So It's a little murky. It's strange when you read the document because it just carved out this one little section for the benefit of the property of the North. Washoe County actually owns that property as well. So we created one big parcel for the Public Safety Training Center.

Thank you. Any other questions? I am just wondering, we've certainly been hearing a lot about this over the last several years, and I'm just wondering where the last information that we have, at least in the staff report, is that on July 6th of 2025, the Public Safety Training Center Executive Board did not support this. Was there any discussions with them or where are we at with that?

So we have been to the Public Safety Training Center Executive Board a couple of times with this project. I think maybe three times in total over the entire length we've been here. As you will recall, trying to think of when it was, it might have been the August 23rd or August 2023 meeting. We provided a letter from that board related to their concerns associated with this project. That letter was part of the letter that we utilized to negotiate through Some of the the terms that are within the development agreement that you see today so for instance one of the big concerns from That board was that in this day and age. There's a real concern that people are Fearful of gunshots right you hear that and in people Anxiety all of those types of things could occur now while you can mitigate those as mr. Grant mentioned with the construction of of the departments utilizing triple-plane glass and some of those other sorts of things, there are other amenities outside. And so the fear, the concern, I guess is the better term, of the board is they do shooting at that facility all the time. You can drive up that road and you hear gunshots because they've got an outdoor range. And so one of the concerns of the board is it's only a matter of time before the development project someone moves in there and petitions this board to stop shooting at that location. That is a concern. And so the way I look at that is that is potential interference with the use of the property in the future. That is a decision that you need to make, whether that is a true statement or not. The access across the parcel in times of an emergency, my personal opinion is In times of emergency, we're probably not going to be training up there. That impact is probably not a big deal. So there are other impacts to the property that you should consider. The executive board up there is concerned about that impact to the, we'll call it the quiet enjoyment of the property that Washoe County has for the purposes of training our community's law enforcement and fire.

And just for legal clarity, the easement is not, well, I'll do it, I'm going to ask this question a different way. If, in fact, the sheriff's office wanted to proceed with an indoor range, which has been something they've been wanting to do for quite some time, and where does that fall in terms of the easement if we were to actually give the easement well we're not really giving it but we're granting the opportunity to release that easement for this project then what kind of jeopardy legally could there be for any permitting or anything that would restrict them from continuing in their long term endeavor of having an indoor facility?

So the way we've negotiated this purchase and sale agreement is there's a compensation of $650,000 that could be put towards a couple of different things that are listed in the staff report. One of those is enclosing one of the bays for the shooting range to create an indoor location. But there's nothing permitting-wise that would be problematic for Washoe County to pursue that based on granting of the season.

long-term or anything like that. Is anyone from the Sheriff's Office here?

I don't believe so.

I guess not. All right. I am just going to state that I still remain concerned about the Public Safety Training Center Executive Board who has been involved, and I appreciate the negotiation and the long-term discussions of trying to mitigate some of those concerns, but it feels that the concern is still there, at least one of them, and there was quite a list, so kudos to you all for going through the list and trying to mitigate Satisfy at least that executive board, but it seems that they have not changed their position overall is is that a fair statement?

I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth Based on the last time we took this project to them for their review They they were not they were all they were opposed to the to the granting of the easement.

Okay. Thank you I'll go ahead and ask for any other questions. I

I should probably make one additional comment.

Oh, sure. Of course. Please.

Depending on what you all decide today, we'll go back and the three partners that own the land will go back and they'll make a decision. Are we doing 420 units because we've got the ability to do that? Or are we doing 200 units because we can do that now? And it's a math question. You know, does this... return on equity warrant doing 200 units up there. And I don't know what the answer to that from the owner's perspective is going to be. I think it's probably going to be, well, let's do the engineering and let's lay it out and let's just do it. I think that's probably the way this is going to go.

You mean with the 200 units? Just for clarification, I don't mean to interrupt you. You're talking about doing the analysis and the cost.

We need to move some roads on the property around. We just need to move some infrastructure around.

Without the easement?

Without the easement. We can do it without the easement. So there is a path where you're going to have 200 units there anyway.

No, I hear you. Is there, is this something that you're thinking you're wanting to do? Are you wanting to proceed with this item? Are you wanting to actually look at, um, taking the vote or do you wanting to come back? Or I just want to make sure I'm giving you the opportunity based on what you just said.

I think the landowners would like clarity. Because this has been dragging on for a long time. I agree. And the landowners would like to know, are we doing 200 units or are we doing 420 units?

Yeah, fair enough. Thank you. I just wanted to give you an opportunity. Thank you.

Do you have anything else? This issue weighs on me because I was very open when this originally came to us and we were talking about housing and the need for housing in the area. And there's a lot of pressure. certainly on this board to look at an easement to double the housing in our region that will not double the housing but double the potential for a housing apartment housing complex in our region and then also making a regional decision on a regional training complex and what that will affect uh I was coming into this thinking, I don't know if I can do this because it's been a difficult process with this board. And I had disclosed that a person who was related to this project had tried to see if they could support my gubernatorial campaign for a vote for support of this project and that's so it's personally left a really difficult taste in my mouth and I know that's being investigated by the state and I disclose this publicly so but I also am like we need housing in the region and uh double of the housing with an easement i don't know why the easement has to go through the middle of the property i'm still very miffed about that we had an easement that was like gonna go around the property and i'm still like why aren't we doing that um and maybe mr salero can clarify that for me um i respect our public safety folks certainly and their concerns um And the issue I have is this property should have probably been purchased by the county if we didn't want anyone to develop it. I have a hard time with that. But then they're guaranteed so many units by right without going through this easement issue. But Man, do we need workforce housing. But is there a guarantee of workforce housing on this property? Not necessarily. You can still charge whatever rents you want. There's no... LIMIT ON THAT AND I KNOW THE LAST DISCUSSION WE HAD AS A BOARD ON THIS, I HAD WANTED TO SEE THAT WE WERE ACTUALLY GOING TO SEE THAT THERE WAS DEED RESTRICTED HOUSING TO ENSURE THAT AT LEAST SOME OF THESE UNITS COULD BE AFFORDABLE. SO I'M HAVING A HARD TIME ON WHAT I WANT TO DO WITH THIS ISSUE. I THOUGHT I WAS WALKING IN SAYING LIKE NO TO THE EASEMENT, BUT I'M GOING BACK AND FORTH. SO I'M SORRY, MADAM CHAIR, I'M STILL KIND OF thinking through this it's a tough decision it's a really tough decision and I think you know as a board do we protect our assets I think that's really important we protect the county's assets additionally do we look at the region as a whole and how we can support that housing piece, especially because the developer has stepped up and wants to give us $650,000 to potentially create a solution that is still on the property today of there's in outdoor shooting and that is disruptive to the entire area, which we also have a, uh, um, um, shelter for our animals there. So I'm going back and forth about that concern. And I guess, Mr. Solero, if you could just again discuss with us and remind me as to why that easement has changed from I don't even know when we started discussing this, 2023, so maybe even before then, and it going around and why we can't necessarily not have it go through the middle of this training facility when it's so hard to find land where the county... can work with our partners and train together. So I understand that that's also a concern. I don't want this coming back a decade later and being like the county didn't protect this asset. So that would be helpful for me.

You bet. For the record, Assistant County Manager Dave Solero, there were three proposed routes across the property based on engineering and what is possible. The route you're talking about, it actually kind of went down in parallel the long 395. Since we started that discussion, actually, it was in the works as the discussion started, but there has been a canine training facility built that interferes with that. We'll call it the southern route, for lack of a better descriptor. And so that left us with two additional routes. One that is depicted in the presentation that I provided, the red line that kind of snakes up the hill. The other one actually went further up to the right. And if you're familiar with the facility, there's an outdoor circular track, essentially. And it branched off that circular track and went up and around further to the north. In working, you know, talking through and trying to negotiate, I remember the board requested we try to negotiate something The users of the facility said, well, if we have to do this, you know, the least impactful to us might be this one in the middle. There's been some engineering and some other things. I think there's some question whether, you know, the layout actually works for, you know, actual evacuations. It is not a straight shot. It's, you know, so there's some questions there, but that is not our purview to determine. That is the City of Reno Fire Department's determination related to the actual evacuation usability of the route. From what I understand, you know, the developers told us that yes, the city of Reno fire department has looked at the route and they don't have concerns, the same concerns that I might, you know, with, with the actual northern route. No, not the northern route, the one, the one through the center, because it's going to snakes up. It's got a couple of hairpin turns in it. Just, you know, trying to define if we need to evacuate people and that's what this road is for. You get a bunch of people on it. How do you actually utilize that? But again, that is not my call. That is the City of Reno Fire Department. They're the ones that are already having jurisdiction on the actual road layout itself. We're simply here to determine whether this impacts our future use of the facility and provides the benefit potential that you need to make the decision. So I hope that answered your question.

So the northern route, is just not on the table. Or would that be a future discussion?

Based on where we're at, I think that is off the table right now. I mean, they both go through the middle of the training props, right? The northern route and the one we're talking about now. They both impact the training ground about the same way. The other piece we were trying to work through in doing this was the least amount of impact during construction for this roadway as well. And so the route that is chosen is seen generally as the least impactful to the training facility while construction is going on. I think that's probably why it got preference rather than the northern route, which still, again, impacts a good portion of the training facility props.

Is there any benefit to the route to the residence that it connects to the north, out of curiosity, in your opinion?

So both routes connect to Rager Road. Right. So the connection doesn't matter. And again, I suppose at some point it could be utilized to evacuate, if need be, the residence to the north through the training facility and out that way as well. This is not a one-way roadway. Uh, but since they both have the same access point, it would be the same impact to the, to the community. Um, so it's not like we're connecting at two different streets with the different routes.

Sorry, but regardless of the route, is there, I mean, you're saying potentially there's an evacuation plus, uh, for the other residents.

I understand if we, if we evacuate from the apartment complex through that neighborhood and out, Um, I don't, I don't think either, either route here makes an impact there. There are very limited locations where, uh, an easement can go from the, uh, applicants property to anywhere North. Um, the, the property to the, to the East of this is, um, it's open space. Uh, it's very, very difficult terrain. I don't believe there's an Avenue to get a roadway there. Um, so certainly, um, I would hope that the City of Reno Fire Department as well is understanding of the additional impact of this emergency access into that neighborhood to the north. To your point, again, that neighborhood to the north, I believe, really only has one means of egress out of their back out as it's currently constructed today.

Yeah.

But we haven't done any studies on whether that's necessary that they have another route or... Yeah. Yeah.

Anything else? No. I feel your struggle. I mean, I too... We've all been dealing with this in terms of, and I can imagine your frustration, Mr. Grant, in terms of having what appears to be a clear path of a project that got approved and now... finding that there's a barrier, if you will, based on having to come to the commission for an easement discussion. That's really what this is. And the struggle that I have with this is that I wish we could unring the bell in the sense of the city of Reno as an example, working, you know, a little deeper on this before just giving a blanket approval because the easement is an option. It's not something that we have to do. But at the same time, we have to balance what's up there. That facility. And that's why I asked about where the executive board, because they do have a deep regional look at how things should not only be right now, but also in the future. And so I really, I remember, I didn't remember the three to you said that Mr. Slower, but I remember that there were these various easements And there was even concerns with those. So it's not that there's one even line that I am aware of that would make this amenable to everyone. So I am going to support the fact that the professionals that are with the sheriff's office, are taking this very seriously as well, and that I feel that the regional public safety executive board has, even though they don't have authority, if you will, on this, they do have a say. And I know that they have, along with emergency management, the regional emergency operations center is up there. I know that they collectively have spent a lot of time looking at various options. I think it's great that you have stepped into the role, Mr. Grant, of being the face of this organization and the investors that are looking at this project because I, too, shared Commissioner Hill's experience, which I have shared with the investigation of a person willing to write a check when I was running an order for this. I know that was then, but it's taken some very interesting twists and turns. What's before us is the facts, and the facts are that It looks like you, Mr. Solero, and the team have gone through, along with Mr. Grant and your investors, an immense amount of time and energy, but I am not going to support this. I just am going to be very clear. Based on what we've had in the past, that has not changed. Even though the list has narrowed, the list is not complete from the Public Safety Executive Board. And I think if there were a possibility of another easement that everyone could agree on, I think we might be in a different place. But I feel honest. I need to be transparent with you. And I hope that you're respectful of the fact that we've all been trying to make this work. And I know that you of all people want to make this work. So it is a struggle, as you've heard, because we're also looking at housing as being a number one priority in our community. And you've been offering that, even though to the point of a free market, you have the ability to have those units priced as you see fit. So I'm not asking for anything on that, by the way. So if there isn't any other questions or discussion or need for clarification, um, this is an actionable item and I'm going to ask if there's any public comment at this time.

There is none.

Thank you. Anything else? All right. Any, any final words, Mr. Grant?

Uh, just two things. Sure. Just to repeat the 200 unit projects, could go forward if the investors choose to. And it really, the math is actually very simple. It's about $300 more per month per unit in rent. It just kind of calculates really pretty easily. And on the untoward behavior on a prior person involved in the project, when it comes to my reputation, I am ruthless. That person's been terminated, and whatever happens, happens. Don't have any involvement with that person any longer.

Thanks for that clarification. We appreciate that. And please don't think that any comments are directed to you or any of the investors. That's not our intent. Thank you. All right. Well, we're going to call for a motion at this time. I don't know who would like to do that, either Commissioner Herman or Commissioner Hill. Or I will do it. I'm going to go ahead and move that we not move forward with the project. Move to not approve an easement purchase and sale agreement between Washoe County, the grantor, and Dandini Spectrums Holding LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Corporation grantee, DSH.

Second.

So I have a motion by myself and a second by Commissioner Hill. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Nay. All right. The motion does not carry. So I will look to you, Ms. Gustafson.

Yes, so for under NRS 241.0355, because this board is composed of all elected officials, you do need a majority of the total board membership for any motion to carry, which because we only have three members present, that would require unanimous approval for any motion to carry. It's at your discretion to call for another motion if you prefer or not.

You know, I'll call for the motion, but I do want clarification on one point, if I could, at this time. What would end up happening if it ends up being in the same result as it is right now?

Then if there was a motion to approve it and that motion did not get a 3-0 vote, then that motion would also fail. So you would have both motions would fail and no action would be taken on this item.

Great. I just wanted to get that clarified. We can try it again. So my motion is going to remain the same, that I'm going to move to not approve as I just stated. That's my motion.

Second.

So we have a motion and a second. All those in favor of the motion not to approve, signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed?

Nay.

So motion remains 2-1. So we are going to end the round. And thank you, Mr. Grant. And it might be a great opportunity to look at what those costs might pencil out. Maybe something will happen in a miracle way for construction costs to somehow just be so affordable for not only Nevada but the whole country. So thank you so much. Thank you for, you know, your clarity and your candor and your integrity. Appreciate it.

Thank you.

All right we're going to close item 10 and we're going to move now to the block vote and just as a reminder Vice Chair Garcia is not on the line so Commissioner Hill, would you be so kind to do the block vote?

Absolutely. I move to block vote 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21.

Thank you. Are there any questions or any clarification on any of these items?

OKAY. I'M GOING TO ASK FOR PUBLIC I'M GOING TO ASK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, THOUGH. COMMENT, THOUGH. OKAY. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT?

I'M CHECKING ALL THE ITEMS. I'M CHECKING ALL THE ITEMS. THERE IS NOBODY SIGNED IN FOR THERE IS NOBODY SIGNED IN FOR ANY OF THEM IN BLOCK. ANY OF THEM IN BLOCK.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ALL RIGHT. I am. Do you have a second or did you second it? I didn't make the motion. Do you want to? I made the motion. Oh, I'll second it.

Okay. Thank you. We'll get it straight. I just, I've been dealing with nuisance properties, um, in my district and I just commend the staff for trying to look at ways that we can, um, have parity with Reno and Sparks on these issues when folks do not manage their properties properly. And I'm hoping that item 16 really makes a difference. And I can't wait to let my constituents know who are concerned about these properties that we're looking at higher, steeper fees and fines for these type of actions. That's all.

No, I agree, and I'll just echo the point. I think we need to give Vice Chair Garcia the recognition she deserves on working on all those nuisance properties that have really moved not only what we just approved in terms of the nuisance code. I met with enforcement as well. I think we all in our own districts have seen this and being able to strengthen that. that for our community is to be commended. So thank you, Vice Chair Garcia. Thank you to the entire staff for looking at how we can strengthen this, and hopefully we'll see an immediacy in some of the gaps that have been in place.

Thank you.

All right. We're going to go ahead and move then to item 11. We didn't vote on it. I'm sorry. Oh, we did. Oh, we didn't. No. We didn't. I'm sorry.

That's okay. We just were having a conversation.

We were having a conversation. I was just going to have a conversation. I'm so sorry. No worries. So any further discussion? All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries for the block as presented unanimously. Thank you.

All right, we'll now move to item 11, Manager Thomas. Thank you, item 11 is an update discussion and direction to staff regarding potential bill draft requests for the 84th session of the Nevada Legislature. The subjects of the potential BDRs or bill draft requests to be considered are included on the agenda and we will have a presentation to walk through those. So the board may direct staff to pursue these BDRs on one or more of the subjects or bring back other possible concepts on subjects that the board identifies as being in the best interest of the county for approval at a future meeting. We are joined this afternoon by Kayden Smeteevich who will walk us through those items. Thank you.

Welcome.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Commissioners. For the record, my name is Kayden Smeteevich and I have the privilege of serving as Government Affairs Liaison for Washoe County. This will be our second discussion in this legislative interim regarding bill draft requests. You'll recall that I was first before you in March of this year. and you gave some direction then, so I'll provide some updates today and look for additional direction from you as we move very quickly towards the deadline for submission of our bill draft requests for this session. I won't spend a lot of time on this. We discussed this before, but just for anyone who may be reviewing this in the future, there is the statutory authority regarding bill draft requests and a visual of where we are in the process. You'll see the green box around the... One section there, that is where we are today. As I said, we move very quickly. We've got about six weeks left until we reach the deadline for submission of BDRs that have been allocated to Washoe County. There are different deadlines for different entities that are authorized to submit bill drafts. And so while this is our final opportunity, there are other entities that have the authority to submit bill draft requests further actually even after the legislative session has begun. And so I want to be clear that While today, I would be seeking your direction on bill draft requests that we would be submitting or others that they kind of fall into two categories, some that would be required for that September deadline and others that may continue beyond that. As I shared with you when we first discussed this earlier this year, as we look at BDR considerations, we take into account a number of different things. Those are outlined there in the interest of time. I will not go through them again, but happy to answer questions when we get to the conclusion of the presentation. So an update on proposal number one that was brought before you in March. This would require local government that submits an erroneous billing file to a county treasurer to reimburse the county for any expenses that the county incurs as a result of the errors contained in that billing file. This board directed me to submit that item to the Nevada Association of Counties Legislative Committee for consideration that that concept be taken up as a NACO, that's the acronym for that organization, BDR. We are awaiting determination from NACO as to whether or not the item will be submitted. NACO's legislative committee has convened, has considered a number of different proposals and they are authorized to submit five bill draft requests. They have eight concepts that are under consideration, and it is expected that their board of directors will potentially take action on that at their July 31st meeting. And so I can come back and provide an update to this board on August 25th as to where the Association of Counties, assuming their board of directors does take action on the 31st, I can update you then on that item. You'll see when we get to the recommendations that at this point, my recommendation would be to leave this filed with NACO, but if they do not take it up, that we consider submitting this as one of our own. Proposal number two relates to allowing a maximum of 3% of revenues from the surcharge imposed by a county for enhancement of the telephone system used for reporting emergencies and purchase and maintenance of event recording devices known as the 911 telephone surcharge to be used by the county to pay the costs associated with administration of the surcharge. your board directed that we seek sponsorship from an individual legislator or potentially submit this as a Washoe County BDR. Following that direction, I went out and spoke with potential sponsors and other stakeholders and based on the feedback that I received during that process, that there are a number of other things happening regionally that are under consideration now around dispatch and other things that may impact the way that these services are provided in the community, that those folks felt like it was premature for this to come forward and that perhaps some of those other efforts would result in efficiencies that might help reduce the administrative burden. And so at this point, I would no longer recommend that you pursue this BDR and we'll be asking, when we get to recommendations, we'll be recommending that you rescind the prior direction. Proposal number three has to do with equity and authority for and distribution of transient lodging taxes. and surcharge revenues collected in the Washoe County portion of the Lake Tahoe Basin for the purpose of establishing a dedicated funding source for public transit to, from, and within the portion of the Lake Tahoe Basin located in our county. Your board directed that we submit this item to the legislative committee for the review and oversight of the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency and the Marlette Lake Water System, and the recommendation was submitted to the committee. consistent with the board's direction. I will say that we've had quite a lot of discussion with the chair of that committee and other stakeholders. Your recommendations were submitted as they were approved by this board. July 10th was the deadline to submit those. The committee will meet on August 20th. to consider their bill draft requests. It may be that ultimately what that committee decides to forward as a BDR could be slightly different from what you had proposed and you may also recall that I requested and this board agreed to give some We were not specific about a dollar amount in a surcharge or percentage of existing revenues to allow the stakeholders and the committee discretion there. So it may be that that's different, and I'll look forward to providing you an update with that at your August 25th meeting. There was additional discussion when we last covered these. There was a comment from the board that you wish to see continued appropriation of funding for permanent supportive housing. You wished for me to inquire as to whether a bill regarding automatic recounts of elections similar to Assembly Bill 287 of the 2025 legislative session is likely to return in the 2027 session. At this time, I am not aware of any intent. This topic was not considered by the Joint Interim Standing Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections. And I am not aware of any individual legislator that is looking to bring that item forward. On March 21st, excuse me, April 21st, during one of your strategic planning workshops, when you were receiving a presentation from our public administrator, there was some discussion regarding the possibility of the functionality and access to the Nevada lockbox to be expanded to include a state document such as last will and testaments. Subsequent to that meeting, public administrator Klitschke and I have had discussion with the Secretary of State's office and they were very receptive to our interests in seeing that. Those discussions continue. They did indicate the Secretary of State is entitled to bill draft requests and that it could potentially be incorporated into one of their bill drafts. Those discussions are ongoing. And we'll discuss it further when we get to the recommendation as to whether or not this board might want to hold one of your BDRs or just continue those discussions and let that be a decision of the secretary given that this is a program of his state, of his department. One correction to make here, I have that last item identified as June 26th. It's actually June 23rd. My apologies for that error. The board expressed interest in exploring legislative remedies to allow the county to act more expeditiously to remediate pervasive public nuisances, particularly on properties where no... known owners could be identified. Assemblymember Heather Goulding has indicated a willingness and desire to carry a bill on this topic, and I have been working with the District Attorney's Office and our Community Services Department on preparing some recommendations for her that could form the substance of a bill. As you well know, many of the current situations that we're dealing with are in Sun Valley and that happens to be her legislative district. So an opportunity there for her to carry that on our behalf and on behalf of the constituents in that district. Sorry, I need to back up one more. What I don't have on this slide is that actually on the 26th of June, Commissioner Hill, I believe you inquired when the board was considering the declaration of state of emergency following the terrible circumstances with the Hidden Valley flash flooding, you had asked whether or not there was a possible legislative remedy to some of the concerns that had been raised with respect to insurance policies. I've done some research and while not a legal opinion, my research leads me to believe that at the state level there is not likely to be much that could be addressed legislatively. As this board may know, the majority of flood policies issued in our country and certainly in our county are through the National Flood Insurance Program that is administered by FEMA. You may purchase them through your local or whomever you carry your homeowners insurance through. But because that program is largely structured through a federal program, oversight is somewhat limited at the state level. There are other types of policies, surplus policies that are available that could fall within the jurisdiction of the state. Given the nature of those policies, typically oversight is somewhat limited. And so at this time, it is my belief that there is not a likely substantial or significant remedy to be had at the state level. I wanted to provide that information for you. And so with that, I have four recommendations for you, and then we'll seek your input and direction on any other topics. So the first would be that contingent upon the Association of Counties not selecting this item as one of their BDRs that we would submit as our own the requirement that local governments repay counties for any costs incurred as a result of erroneous billing files that they remitted. To rescind the prior direction to seek a sponsor or to submit as one of our own BDRs amendments to allow a maximum of 3% of those revenues from the surcharge the 911 telephone surcharge for the reasons that I covered, to direct us to continue discussions with the Secretary of State's office regarding types of documents eligible to be filed in the lockbox and the entities authorized to access them, and to return to the board in August to provide an update on those discussions. and then to continue to work with Assemblymember Goulding regarding a BDR to allow for local governments to expedite abatement of public nuisances under certain circumstances. And that concludes my update and presentation, Madam Chair. I'm happy to answer any questions on the information I've provided or to take further direction or questions that you may have.

Thanks.

Appreciate it.

I am actually going to ask for public comment before we go into any discussion. Do we have any public comment?

We do. We have Andy Chapman-Sangdon.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair and Commissioners. Thank you for your time today. It is in the afternoon, I see. So, my name is Andy Chapman. I'm the President and CEO of Travel North Tahoe, Nevada. We are the official destination management organization for the Washoe-Tahoe portion of the basin, of which you guys have oversight as the jurisdictional oversight. We currently do get a percentage of the TOTs that are collected in our regions come back to our region. What we have found is Tahoe is in a new reality. And I know Commissioner Hill understands this very well, being from that district as well and the work you have all done. But how we manage the destination is critical and how we manage the destination has changed. What we do know is the current collection of funds that come back to our organization to reinvest back into our community, in the environment, into the community, and into the business economy is not enough for the job at hand. Things have changed since the pandemic. We have a lot of people traveling up to Tahoe. There's a lot of demands on Tahoe, and there's a recognition that we need to look at how we manage Tahoe differently. I do want to applaud this commission for looking at the particular two BDRs that I'm speaking of, which is the surcharge and the redistribution of the current TOT collections. as well as working with your staff on this to work collaboratively with the stakeholders that we have been working with as well. We have been interested in these discussions for some time. This is one of the various strategies that are being considered. Another is a business improvement district bill that we are bringing forward in the 2027 session as well. And it will take many tools to manage the district as we have seen it here. But really it is how are we looking to invest in transit enhancements, user mitigation, downtown beautification, and economic vitality. We do know, again, the way that the current funding works, it is not sufficient to do the job. So we do applaud the efforts being done here, and I thank you for your time and commitment and your staff's time and commitment as well. So thank you.

Thank you.

There's nobody else signed in. Thank you.

Ms. Mateevich, thank you for putting this together. And I just want to clarify that I serve as the chair of the NACO Legislative Board, and as Ms. Matijevic clearly indicated, July 10th was our meeting as a committee that has submitted the priorities, and the staff are working through everything, and we'll be presenting what there are eight bills, so there'll be five, And those five will be presented to the full NACO board at the end of July, at their July meeting. And I do really appreciate the deadline because it is here, essentially. It's here. And so although there's always a lot of work that needs to be done and things do come up, you never can tell what might be a surprise. But at the same time, just the planning and the research and the vetting and this discussion is appreciated for all of the work that you've done and the continued work you will be doing. So thank you. So having said that, I'll just open it up to questions or comments. Do you have anything? Ms. Hill.

I HAVE TO REITERATE WHAT THE CHAIR JUST SAID. YOU HAVE BEEN AMAZING WORKING WITH YOU ON THESE TAHOE ISSUES AND I KNOW THAT YOU ARE EVEN TRYING TO WORK WITH OUR PARTNERS ON THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AS MUCH AS WE CAN COORDINATE AND ENSURE THAT THESE BILLS ARE SUCCESSFUL OR AT LEAST ONE OF THESE BILLS WILL BE SUCCESSFUL SO WE CAN ENSURE THAT WE HAVE PROPER REVENUES TO TAKE CARE OF the gem of our region, which is Lake Tahoe. So thank you so much. And you've been so wonderful in vetting these other things that come up that I shoot you emails on and ask you questions on and even following the board meetings and seeing, oh, you know, this was mentioned. Let's go follow up on this and seeing what you could do in the lockbox already with the Secretary of State without us having to remember and bringing it back to the board. Thank you so much. That is just really great work. and what I've been looking for in this position. So you've just been wonderful to work with, and I really appreciate your dedication and just doggedness, which we have to do. Even though the legislature only meets every two years, we got to dog our issues or else they won't happen because these are all really important to us. I don't have... additional concerns that I want to bring right now as far as the County Commission but I'm really excited for the session to start and to get the updates and hear what what else is floating out there and how we can participate and I just really appreciate all your work so thank you very much and I'm willing to support your recommendations as they stand today Thank You madam chair Commissioner Herman do you have anything

I just wanted to give thanks to our presenter, our lady here that does such a wonderful job for us. I have enjoyed working with her for the last many years and she's so good at getting things organized for us and sorting out all the things that we bring to her that probably just don't have any possibilities and those that are important to the majority of the people of our county. So thank you once again.

Thank you, Commissioner Herman. And the respect that you have at the legislature should not be ignored. And even the association in terms of me always bring up NACO, but there are many other organizations that have an immense amount of respect for your integrity, for your hard work. And that is really caring Washoe County. And so thank you for that very much. Really. Thank you. I too, I'm going to support your recommendation. And given that there isn't any additional public comment, I'll entertain a motion at this time.

I'm sorry. Was there a particular motion or can I just say as outlined in the staff report? Uh, yes. Uh, direct staff to submit the Washoe County BDR, uh, as outlined BDRs that's outlined in this staff report. All right.

Okay.

Oh, there you go.

Okay. So we have a motion in a second to recommend or to accept the recommendations best based on this Mattia bitch. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you so much. Thank you. Appreciate it. Get some rest now. All right. We're now going to move to item number 12.

Can we take a break after the item 12?

Do you want to take a break now? That would be great. Okay, I think we're going to take a break. See, somebody asked. We get 1.25. We're going to take a 10-minute break. Thank you.

Bye.

We're gonna call this meeting back to order at 1.44. Thank you for everyone's patience. We'll now move to item 12. And it's my understanding that this is an introduction and first reading. Oh, Commissioner Herman, are you there? I'm hearing dialing. Thank you. Commissioner Herman, are you there? I am here. Thank you so much. We called the meeting back to order. Thank you for your patience while we do that. We are going to move to item 12, which is introduction and first reading of an ordinance. So I'm waiting for someone to read that.

This, if introduced, will be bill number 1956 to adopt a development agreement for Woodland Village Town Center WTM 20-005 to extend the deadline for recording the final map to May 20th of 28.

Thank you. And that was bill 1956? Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Do we have any public comment?

There is none.

Do we have any... desire for any additional information on this? Commissioner Herman, do you have any questions on this? No. Thank you. Okay. I'll entertain a motion for bill number 1956.

Move to introduce bill number 1956 as outlined in the staff report with a second reading coming August 25th, 2026. Thank you so much.

All right. We'll close item 12. We'll now move to item 13, another introduction and first reading.

If introduced, this will be bill number 1957 to adopt a development agreement for ridges at Hunter Creek, TM16-005 to extend the deadline for recording the final map to June 28th, or 2028.

Great. Do we have any public comment? There is none. Thank you. Do we have any requests for additional information? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion.

Move to introduce bill number 1957 and schedule the second reading for the ordinance on August 25th, 2026, as outlined in the staff report.

Thank you. All right, we'll go ahead and close item 13. We'll now move to item 22, which is the second reading.

This will be ordinance number 1764, an ordinance amending the Washoe County Code at Chapter 110, Development Code Article 408, by applying the findings that reference site-specific characteristics only when those characteristics are present on the parcels in question to ensure the design, flexibility, and associated public benefits inherent to common open space development is potentially available to all subdividable parcels. That was formerly Bill Number 1955.

Thank you, do we have any public comment?

There is none.

Do either of the commissioners wish to hear additional information? This is a second reading. Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion at this time.

Move to adopt bill number 1955, an ordinance amending Washoe County code chapter 110 as outlined in the staff report. And that's for ordinance 1764.

Ordinance 1764. I heard that. Okay, I'll second that motion. Oh, we have a second by, no, Commissioner Herman, please. So we have a motion by Commissioner Hill and a second by Commissioner Herman. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. We'll now move to item 23, Manager Thomas.

Thank you, Madam Chair. This is your final public comment, and comment heard under this item will be limited to three minutes per person, and it may pertain to matters both on and off the commission agenda. Unused time may not be allocated to other speakers, and please make your comments to the commission as a whole. Thank you. First up, we have Diana Christensen.

I'm here today to make a formal request of this honorable commission. After the recent Spanish Springs cab meeting, I was inspired to address the commission in regards to about 200 acres of agriculturally zoned properties in Spanish Springs on Pyramid Highway between Calle de la Plata and Alamosa Drive. After the change in the master plan a couple of years ago, there is interest in changing the zoning of a portion of these properties to industrial. Even though the master plan just says 22 acres of warehousing, the developer is seeking 80 or 90 acres of industrial in the first proposal. All properties are adjacent. I don't see anyone else wanting to use that acreage for anything else once industrial zoning is approved. These properties all border on housing that has been approved by the previous county commissions and built over the last 20 years when all industrial was limited to the west side of Pyramid Highway. The Spanish Springs Business Center on the west side of Pyramid Highway was approved about 25 years ago before most of the housing out that far was approved. Many of us looked at this as proof that industrial zoning would stay on the west side of Pyramid Highway. Decisions for purchasing homes were made with the belief that this decision would stand. Now the developers are seeking properties on the east side of the highway as a prime location. This would put the industrial industry against the fence of many homeowners. This would greatly impact the approximate 2,000 homeowners who believed the previous master plan. From the businesses that have moved into Spanish Springs Business Center, we have learned about good neighbors and poor neighbors. If a zoning change is approved, similar businesses will be moving over to our side of the highway. i understand that we need more jobs and revenue however i would request a review of the current industrial zoning code i would like to see more stringent noise light and hours of operation restrictions in a revised industrial zoning code since there are existing houses adjacent to the proposed acreage for rezoning There is great difference between the braying of donkeys and a factory that runs major noisy equipment 24-7, 365 days a year. OSHA required backup beepers at 4 a.m. and warehouses that may operate three shifts. There are also many compatible businesses. I am only asking that we make the zoning of this industrial area more compatible with current residents. The previous commissioners thought businesses And homes could coexist. I do too. I believe in compromise. Each party needs to give a little. A good compromise is when both parties leave the table equally unhappy. I also think that the distance for notifying individuals about a proposed zoning change needs to be increased. It is currently 500 feet. That means in this case only one row of houses.

Thank you.

There's nobody else signed in, but I do have emails to submit for the record.

Thank you. We'll go ahead and close public comment and now move to item 24, Manager Thomas.

This is your Commissioner's County Manager's announcements, reports, and updates to include Board and Commission updates, requests for information, or topics for future agendas. Do you have anything? I do not. Commissioner Hill?

Mm-mm. Commissioner Herman, do you have anything? No, I don't. Thank you so much for your patience being online too. I don't have anything as well. So we're going to go ahead and adjourn at 1.52. Thank you so much.