TUESDAY 10:00 A.M. SEPTEMBER 17, 2024
PRESENT:
Mary Kandaras, Chief Deputy District Attorney
The Washoe County Board of Commissioners convened at 10:00 a.m. in regular session in the Commission Chambers of the Washoe County Administration Complex, 1001 East Ninth Street, Reno, Nevada. Chair Hill acknowledged that September 21 was International Day of Sign Language and highlighted the importance of preserving and promoting the use of sign language for the benefit of deaf communities worldwide. She noted there would be a special appearance by Ms. Andrea Daerice to interpret the Pledge of Allegiance in American Sign Language (ASL). Following the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of our Country, Chief Deputy County Clerk Cathy Smith called roll and the Board conducted the following business:
Calvary Chapel of Reno Sparks Pastor Felix Ortiz thanked Commissioners for their service to the County and provided an invocation.
Mr. Nicholas St. Jon displayed documents that were placed on file with the Clerk. He claimed the documents outlined the results of the 2020 election between Ms. Marsha Berkbigler and Chair Hill. He asked that the camera's view in the Commission Chambers be switched so those watching online could see the documents he was presenting. He asserted that the first document he distributed was from the first half of the election and depicted normal voting patterns. He reiterated his request for the camera angles to be switched. Chair Hill asked that the timer be paused, and Chief Deputy District Attorney (CDDA) Mary Kandaras told Mr. St. Jon that he should proceed with his comments as the documents were visible to the Board and those in the Commission Chambers. Mr. St. Jon declared it was his right for his documents to be broadcast to the public. Chair Hill asked that the timer be restarted, and Mr. St. Jon demanded that it remain paused. CDDA Kandaras asked Mr. St. Jon to proceed with his comment, to which Mr. St. Jon responded that he would not continue until he received his time back and his documents
were displayed to the public. He alleged that the Board members violated their oaths of office by denying him his First Amendment right to freedom of speech. CDDA Kandaras requested that Mr. St. Jon proceed with his comment, to which Mr. St. Jon replied that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) was violating his rights. CDDA Kandaras informed Mr. St. Jon he was at the point of disrupting the meeting. Mr. St. Jon opined that CDDA Kandaras disrupted the meeting and his time. CDDA Kandaras asked Mr. St. Jon to continue his comments. Mr. St. Jon displayed another document and speculated that the document depicted what happened when votes were switched inside the voting machines. He stated the document was what election fraud and cheating looked like. He demanded that the BCC remove the voting machines. He remarked that he planned to file charges against Chair Hill for violating his First Amendment rights, disrupting his time, and stealing the time he was allotted to speak to the Board.
* * * * * * * * * * *
After leaving the podium, Mr. St. Jon chose to stand at the front of the Commission Chambers. CDDA Kandaras asked Mr. St. Jon to sit down. Chair Hill told Mr. St. Jon he was not permitted to stand at the front of the room and intimidate the Board. Mr. St. Jon declared he would not sit down, and Chair Hill asked him to leave the meeting. CDDA Kandaras recommended that the BCC take a recess and asked that all Commissioners leave the Chambers per the rules of the Board.
* * * * * * * * * * *
Mr. Terry Brooks began his comment by signing his name in American Sign Language (ASL). He read an original poem about social interaction and mental health in relation to homelessness.
Mr. Troy Regas discussed the Seven Magic Mountains (SMM) art installation. He said he visited over 50 businesses in the area and talked with them about the Board’s plan to spend $500,000 to move the SMM to Washoe County. He reported that all the businesses he spoke with did not think the SMM was a good use of funds, and many had other ideas of what the money could be used for. He listed some recommendations, including a park in the South Valleys and an improved plan for fire emergencies. He remarked that he knew someone who worked in construction and claimed that for
$100,000, he could duplicate the SMM and pocket $50,000. He recalled that some people told him that the SMM artist had the final say of where the piece would be relocated and that the artist might not want to bring the SMM to Washoe County. He stated he would compile more information about the SMM and bring it before the BCC. He hoped the Board would vote against the SMM item.
Mr. Paul White opined that the homelessness issue was out of control and a danger to the community. He stated that the previous week, he visited areas of the Truckee River from Mayberry to Wingfield and from Wingfield to Lockwood, where some homeless camps were being removed, but many were not. He remarked it violated federal law to allow people to camp along the river. He said he tried to schedule a tour of the Cares Campus but was denied, so he chose to enter independently. He alleged that the Cares Campus staff sold illicit substances to residents, and he noted there were several weapons present in the shelter. He asked the BCC to visit the Cares Campus to learn what was happening there. He reported there were people throwing food at the walls. He speculated that people could languish at Safe Camp until they were given a 10-year voucher for an apartment. He spoke about the Village on Sage Street apartments and claimed all the residents stayed there because of substance abuse. He wondered why the BCC refused to allow Education Crusade to have a 15-minute agenda item to discuss the Cares Campus. He declared that he had attempted to call every Board Member but did not receive a call back. He informed County Manager Eric Brown that he could not find a phone number for him. Chair Hill asked Mr. White to address the full Board. Mr. White did not understand why he did not receive a call from anyone on the BCC. He thought it did not make sense that the County went from 80 unhoused residents to 1,800 in seven years. At that rate, by 2031, the unhoused population in Washoe County would be 36,000 people. He mentioned that the BCC received a brief from Education Crusade that depicted the conditions at the Cares Campus. He asserted that Mr. Grant Denton would be the first person to tell the Board that the programs at the Cares Campus were a failure. He asked why the BCC was okay with letting the homelessness issue go.
Ms. Britton Griffith requested that the Board pull Agenda Item 13, Subitem
5. She stated she was a former board member of the Nevada Humane Society (NHS) and a current board member of Options Veterinary Clinic. She expressed concern that nearly $1 million was slated to go to a single agency that was already well-funded. She remarked that over the previous two years, the community experienced the consequences of giving one animal agency a monopoly control of resources, funding, and support. She opined that what the Board was offering was wonderful and would be life-saving for animals in the community; however, she thought the BCC should work to create a cohesive community program that divided tax dollars among multiple successful agencies that could exponentially expand the impact of the funding. She believed that would allow residents access to quality, transparency, and assistance by way of choice. She listed other organizations that provided similar care, including the Washoe County Regional Animal Services (WCRAS), the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) of Northern Nevada, the Options Veterinary Clinic, and the Pet Humane Network. She hoped the Board would pull the item and include more than one organization to provide the best service for the most people in the County.
Mr. Michael Sullivan provided a document that was placed on file with the Clerk. He stated he volunteered with the United Sovereign Americans and was not an official spokesman. He said the United Sovereign Americans was a nationwide organization with thousands of active volunteers in over 20 states. He declared he was a concerned citizen who wanted to share information about Nevada’s voter database,
uncovered through thousands of hours of research conducted by a qualified and credentialed data team. He opined that the numbers were staggering and could be challenging to comprehend, but one thing was clear: they did not add up. He remarked that just like a checkbook needed to balance, so did the votes. He pointed out that if there were
$10,000 missing from someone’s bank account, they would want to know what happened. He noted if a company had a significant discrepancy in its books, it would conduct an audit. He asserted that the United Sovereign Americans audited the 2022 election using data provided by state election officials. He believed the results indicated that the election might not have been accurate or legally compliant. He did not claim that one candidate won over another or that any election should be overturned. He alleged that the State’s official data from the certified election showed that the votes listed as counted were not all valid and accurate under the law. He said that the document he submitted was a resolution that demanded an end to the inaccuracy and uncertainty that plagued the elections, along with a summary of the United Sovereign Americans’ findings and the laws that applied. He stated he would happily meet with the BCC to review the information and provide additional details. He remarked if the Board had questions that he could not answer, he was committed to obtaining the answers, in writing, from the United Sovereign Americans’ executive team. He thought it was essential for the Board to indicate it would take the issue seriously because people needed support and action from the BCC. He asked the Board to listen to the resolution, pose any questions, and promptly vote for the resolution’s passage. He speculated that the Board’s action on the resolution would illustrate its dedication and support of the constituents' concerns. He mentioned that the next speakers would read the resolution in three parts and conclude the presentation.
Mr. James Benthin stated he was a volunteer for the United Sovereign Americans. He read page 1 of the document provided by Mr. Sullivan and requested that the Board reach out with any questions about the resolution.
Mr. Fred Myer read page 2 of the document provided by Mr. Sullivan. Ms. Victoria Myer read page 3 of the document provided by Mr. Sullivan.
Mr. Clint Bolt read page 5 of the document provided by Mr. Sullivan. He claimed that, according to the law, the voting machines were technically illegal.
Mr. Cliff Nellis said he volunteered for the United Sovereign Americans and was not an official spokesman. He remarked that the BCC had just heard a powerfully written resolution outlining inaccuracies in the 2022 election from registration to certification. He stated that the people wanted meaningful remedies that would proactively protect the validity of the 2024 general election for all Americans. He noted that the resolution cited many United States (US) Supreme Court precedents that supported the need for action. He asserted that laws were ignored, the checkbook was not balanced, and people needed certainty. He claimed that the voting system controlling people’s most important right to choose their representatives did not produce accurate, trustworthy results. He wondered if the anomalies would continue to be ignored and how much it would cost the Country not to fix the problem. He believed the cost was immeasurable and urged
the Board to show its agreement by passing the resolution provided by Mr. Sullivan. He said the United Sovereign Americans had a website showcasing initiatives worldwide and videos explaining the anomalies and law violations found in Nevada and other states.
Ms. Sharron Angle remarked that she was a volunteer for the United Sovereign Americans and not an official spokesperson. She stated that the resolution presented to the Board was the culmination of thousands of hours of work by highly qualified and credentialed volunteer data teams from Nevada and across the Country. She thought many Americans had questions about the trustworthiness of elections, which she wished was not the case, but official data showed that those concerns were valid. She opined that government representatives at all levels were not being transparent or responsive to the information found by the citizen auditors. She declared that people’s right to choose their representatives in legally valid and transparent elections was the foundation on which the Country had been secured. She believed that the BCC had a chance to show those who defended American liberty that they held the same values by passing the proposed resolution. She read page 4 of the document submitted by Mr. Sullivan and asked the Board to sign the resolution.
Ms. Tracy Dean introduced herself as the director of Community Cats, a 25- year-old nonprofit organization focused on spays and neuters. She declared that Community Cats was the first entity to perform spay and neuter services for the WCRAS clinic. She remarked that the organization used the NHS clinic and the Options Veterinary Clinic’s trap, neuter, release (TNR) facility weekly to perform their work. She stated that the NHS was generous in its financial support of Community Cats. She believed that the community could not adopt its way out of its current issue with stray animals. She asserted that more spays and neuters needed to occur to help fix the problem.
Ms. Joni Hammond commended first responders for their work on the Davis Fire. She opined that the fire reminded the public how short-staffed the County’s law enforcement was due to the requirement of their around-the-clock presence, which took officers away from their regularly assigned duties. She spoke about population growth in Washoe County. She wondered if the BCC had performed any audits of the staffing levels for officer patrol around the County, in the jail, and in the infirmary. She believed the jail and infirmary were at capacity and asked if the County planned any additions to those buildings to alleviate overcrowding. She expressed appreciation for Agenda Item 14, Subitem 2, which would allocate approximately $90,000 to determine the recommended commissioned and civilian staffing levels needed to ensure safety for the staff and inmates at the proposed 240-bed medical facility. She thought the Board should analyze the jail's booking department and other housing areas in the same manner. She stated there were many BCC meetings she attended where the Board approved millions of dollars for the Cares Campus, to hire outside consultants on various projects, and to hire more County staff. She asserted that supporting the Washoe County Sheriff’s Office (WCSO) made sense and encouraged the Cities of Reno and Sparks to support their police departments. She said that the WCSO assigned officers to the Fourth Street area because local businesses were unhappy with how the Reno Police Department (RPD) handled cases in the area. She opined that was another task that took the WCSO deputies away from their regularly
assigned duties. She wondered when the last time was that the Commission looked at overall law enforcement to see if it was adequate for the community’s size and demographics. She asked if current staffing levels kept inmates and employees safe and questioned whether the size of the jail accommodated the County’s growth. She believed deploying six WCSO deputies to the BCC meeting was not the best use of their time and that the community should question the Board’s decision to do so.
Mr. Drew Ribar provided documents that were placed on file with the Clerk. He asserted that the Nevada Supreme Court acknowledged that the County made a mistake and noted a highlighted section in his document. He alleged that the BCC restricted the people’s constitutional rights and freedom to petition the government. He thought Chair Hill liked to gavel people down and tell them they could not talk about certain things. He declared that the federal courts determined he could use derogatory language and do whatever he wanted outside of time, place, and manner restrictions. He remarked that public comment was his three minutes, and the only thing the Board could restrict was that he was not permitted to threaten or attack anyone in a manner that would hurt them physically. Mr. Ribar mentioned CDDA Kandaras, and Chair Hill asked him to address the Board as a whole. He stated that CDDA Kandaras liked to say that people were attacking the Board and that she claimed his presence in Chambers with a camera was threatening. He said he just wanted to ask questions about the government, which he paid for with his tax dollars. He wondered why the County’s election officials wanted to hide statistics from the public and why the Board took an hour out of everyone’s time that morning to ensure that a public member could not speak. He expressed his desire for Ms. Marsha Berkbigler to win the District 1 election so Chair Hill would no longer serve on the Board. He asked the County to fire Library Director Jeff Scott. He opined that the Board should serve the public, not rule the public.
Mr. David Walker provided documents that were placed on file with the Clerk. He stated that he was the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Nevada Museum of Art. He spoke about the SMM, created by Mr. Ugo Rondinone. He said the piece took four years to produce and cost $3.5 million. He remarked that the SMM opened outside Las Vegas in 2016 and instantly became a global sensation. It attracted between 1,000 and 2,000 visitors daily and was free to the public. He opined that it was one of the world’s most popular public works of art. He explained that the SMM could not renew its lease with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) due to the Harry Reid International Airport’s expansion plans. He noted that the SMM needed to be relocated by the end of 2026. He stated that the SMM was an iconic symbol of Nevada’s arts, culture, and tourism. He mentioned that American cultural tourism travelers had an annual economic impact of $123 billion. He declared that 30 percent of adults claimed that specific arts and culture or heritage events influenced their choice of travel destination. He summarized the economic impact and vast cultural tourism opportunities that the SMM received according to a report from 2020. He noted that significant public funding came from the Nevada Commission on Tourism, Clark County Parks and Recreation, and the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority (LVCVA). He listed that the SMM's publicity value for earned media attention as of 2020 was $61.1 million. He reported that as of 2020, there were 2,952 online news stories, 413 broadcast stories, and 40 million social media posts about the SMM. He
believed that the SMM was the definition of cultural tourism. He thought the proposed allocation of funds to potentially relocate the SMM from Clark County to Washoe County was not about the Nevada Museum of Art but about harnessing the power of a proven cultural attraction to drive cultural tourism and revenues to Washoe County. As CEO of the Nevada Museum of Art, he wanted to help the County pursue the opportunity if the Board desired.
Ms. Annemarie Grant was disturbed that the BCC called multiple armed men to stifle a man exercising his First Amendment rights. She hoped that, at election time, the voters would dole out consequences for abuse of authority. She opined the morning’s events in the Commission Chambers were no different from what she and her son experienced while protesting at the WCSO. She said they were surrounded by armed men who kept their hands on their guns the entire time and demanded she move to the First Amendment area. She recounted a personal experience where the RPD arrested her brother. She claimed he was treated roughly, which resulted in him passing away at the jail. She recalled that Sheriff Darin Balaam condemned the murder of Mr. George Floyd in 2020, which upset her because she thought Washoe County had several similar cases and was good at sweeping things under the rug. She believed the WCSO lied to her family about what happened to her brother, and she declared there was a video of the incident. She wondered if the community knew that the WCSO had the largest budget in the County. She opined that the WCSO deputies did not need more training; they needed humanity and empathy. She alleged that 16 people had passed away under Sheriff Balaam’s care and custody since 2019. She remarked that the Board had a duty to the County’s most vulnerable community members. She believed allowing the WCSO to self-report to the Board was like a fox guarding a hen house. She reminded the BCC that most people at the Washoe County detention facility were still awaiting their day in court, yet to be convicted of anything. She asserted that police investigating themselves was not transparent and would never lead to accountability. She speculated that District Attorney (DA) Christoper Hicks did not review any of the deaths at the jail, her brother being one of three men who asphyxiated there in one year. Instead of discipline, deputies were promoted and given awards. She stated that none of the WCSO deputies were randomly drug tested, which she thought was a problem.
Ms. Tonja Brown displayed an image on her cell phone. She stated she was with Advocates for the Inmates and Innocent. She asserted that the image she displayed was a motion for discovery filed in 1988, which she claimed was found in a Washoe County DA’s file when the Honorable Judge Brent Adams issued an order to turn over the entire file. She announced that if people had a convicted loved one or one about to stand trial, they should pay close attention to her comment. She alleged that her brother spent 21 years in prison for a crime he did not commit. She stated that before her brother passed away, some handwritten notes that belonged to the prosecuting attorney in his case were discovered. She thought the attorney defied the court order to turn over all the evidence. She believed that her brother’s case had a prime suspect that was withheld from the defense, and there was favorable evidence that contradicted almost every witness who testified, including the victims. She said the Conviction Integrity Committee (CIC) was implemented within the DA’s Office. She declared that she applied to the CIC in 2018 to
review her brother’s case but was denied. In 2022, she submitted a public records request to determine how many cases were submitted to the CIC. From that request, she learned there was a similar case to her brother’s; the only difference was that the case did not claim a Brady Violation, which occurred if evidence was withheld. She remarked that the case received a thorough review from the CIC. She declared that she claimed a Brady Violation in her application to the CIC and provided exculpatory evidence that was withheld, including the fact that she hired a private investigator who located the prime suspect in the case, but her application was denied a review. She alleged that the CIC violated its policies, and she asked the Board to visit her Facebook page to review the evidence.
Mr. Tim McGivney was not present when called to speak.
Mr. Matthew Wilkie expressed concern about short term rentals (STR). He understood that property owners might view STRs as a profitable opportunity, but he thought their negative impacts on the community could not be overlooked. He believed STRs contributed to the housing crisis because as more properties were converted, the availability of long term rentals diminished, driving up prices for residents and making it increasingly difficult for families to find affordable housing. He declared that STRs disrupted stable living arrangements and neighborhoods, increasing transient populations and decreasing community cohesion. He claimed they also led to frequent turnover of guests, which could result in noise complaints and lack of parking and accountability. In addition to the social impacts, he wanted to bring issues regarding property taxation to the Board’s attention. While showing a friend and her husband how to look up their property on the Assessor's Office’s website, they decided to look at the neighboring rental property so he could show them what a high-end tax cap versus a low-end tax cap looked like. He noticed that the rental property was also listed as low-cap. He looked up the homeowner and learned they owned 12 homes in Washoe County, all listed as primary low-income residences. He noted that the owner’s mailing address was in California. He wondered how a person could have 12 houses listed as primary residences and urged the County Assessor to investigate those discrepancies. He wanted the properties to be appropriately taxed as investment properties, reflecting their actual use and impact on the housing supply. He mentioned the staff’s recommendation regarding STRs and thought if the property were listed as a primary residence, there would be a decrease in fees. He asserted that by addressing STR regulations and assessing out-of-state taxes, the County could ensure that the housing market served residents rather than distant investors. He stated his mother was a former sign language instructor at Camp Sign Shine in Lake Tahoe, and he appreciated that the BCC acknowledged sign language day. He wondered when the next Community Homelessness Advisory Board (CHAB) meeting would occur and said the County could not continue having significant gaps between meetings. He remarked that three CHAB members, Commissioner Clark, Reno City Councilmember Devon Reese, and Sparks City Councilmember Kristopher Dahir, had all requested monthly CHAB meetings, which Mr. Wilkie would like to see happen.
Ms. Jerleen Bryant stated she was the CEO of the NHS. She thanked the Board for the opportunity to discuss the critical funding request that she believed would strengthen the entire animal welfare network in Washoe County. She thought there was
misinformation and a lack of understanding in the community about the potential funds from the County and hoped her comments would help alleviate any confusion about the funding. She remarked that in February 2024, NHS partnered with WCRAS to host a town hall meeting that was attended by 125 community members, including representatives from TNR, local rescue organizations, and community animal welfare advocates. The message they heard from everyone in the room was loud and clear: Washoe County desperately needed access to affordable spay and neuter services. She said overpopulation overwhelmed the shelters and rescues, and the community struggled with the high cost of surgeries, which could run upwards of $1,200 for an animal at a private veterinary clinic. NHS requested $750,000 to re-launch and expand its high-quality, high-volume spay and neuter program. She thought the program was vital to addressing the ongoing issue of pet overpopulation in the community. She aimed to perform 5,000 surgeries in the first year and 7,000 surgeries in the second year, bringing the NHS back to pre-pandemic service levels. She declared that would directly reduce the number of unwanted litters and the strain on WCRAS, local shelters, rescues, and community resources. She noted the service was for owned animals in the community, not those in the NHS shelter. She asserted the initiative was impactful because it extended beyond just the NHS. She aimed to collaborate with smaller rescues, TNR groups, and WCRAS to ensure that affordable spay and neuter services were available to everyone. A significant project component would be implementing a voucher system that allowed smaller rescues and TNR partners to obtain free spay and neuter services for the animals they cared for. Ultimately, she did not think the funding was just a temporary fix; it was a long-term investment in the health and well- being of Washoe County’s animal population. She believed it was a chance to create sustainable solutions to overpopulation, empower smaller rescues, and ensure that every pet owner could access essential spay and neuter services, no matter their financial situation.
Ms. Natalie Stering provided a document that was placed on file with the Clerk. She stated she was the local site director for Nation’s Finest, which had received an ongoing County award for eight to ten years. She read from her distributed document. She declared that Nation’s Finest had served over 1,300 people annually with at least soft-touch assessments, and over 818 of those individuals received benefits.
Ms. Marsha Berkbigler spoke about Agenda Item 14, Subitem 4, the SMM art installation. She opined that the piece was beautiful, but she did not understand why Washoe County would spend $500,000 for rocks when seniors were not being fed properly. She stated that she attended the senior breakfast and could not eat the meal because she did not like biscuits and gravy. She said there were no eggs, milk, or liquid coffee cream. She remarked that people were served powdered cream for their coffee, which was not hot. She noted that many BCC members had been to her house, which had a lot of art. She declared she liked the Nevada Museum of Art and would not deny that the SMM was a beautiful piece of art that could probably create some tourism for Washoe County. She claimed that no amount of tourism or positive press was more important than ensuring senior citizens were cared for. She believed that the County could do many other things with $500,000. She wondered how the item ended up grouped with different projects and guessed it was a new style of managing how the BCC created agendas. She asked the Board to think twice
before it spent $500,000 that could be allocated to feed seniors, veterans, and others in need of aid.
Ms. Penny Brock provided documents that were placed on file with the Clerk. She stated that as each day passed during the election season, Americans were overwhelmed by what they saw, from the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump the previous Sunday to what people witnessed that morning in the Commission Chambers over someone who wanted to show election data. She asserted that the Commission Chambers belonged to the people who elected the Commissioners to conduct their business. She believed the Constitution would cease to exist if the elections were not fair and honest. She declared that the County could still have paper ballots and hand counting in the election. She noted that her document was from National Only Citizens Vote Week and asked how the BCC planned to ensure that non-citizens could not vote in the general election. She said that the Bill of Rights and the Nevada Constitution declared that only American citizens could vote, yet she knew that non-citizens were voting in Washoe County elections. She read from the document she provided. She thought there were glitches in the presidential preference primary (PPP) and hiccups in the primary election, and it was predicted that the new Voter Registration and Election Management Solution (VREMS) would have bumps.
Ms. Trista Gomez listed topics she could discuss during her comment, including the County’s budget for homeless and substance abuse services, the disenfranchisement of voters in Washoe County, and the impact of development on residents. She wanted to talk about the relationship between the Board members, which she felt was the foundation of the issues in the County. She asserted that she was a native of Washoe County, as was most of her family. She recalled when people associated the community with the television show Reno 911 and did not want to visit the area, which she believed residents were okay with. She remarked that the community saw what uncontrolled development, growth, and new policies did to the County, which she thought was unfortunate. She declared that she had owned a business in Commissioner Clark’s district for 19 years and knew more people in that area than in her district. She expressed concern about how the agenda items were handled and that it seemed like District 4 had very little voice based on the BCC’s structure and how the Commission Chair oversaw the agenda. She claimed Commissioner Clark was punished for the way he handled his dissatisfaction and frustration. As a resident, she did not know what recourse Commissioner Clark had and opined that mean words should not negate Commissioner Clark’s right to advocate for the residents of his district. She said citizens were dissatisfied with the BCC and that the present system did not work. She asked the Board to elect a new Chair of the BCC.
Mr. Aaron Sims thanked the BCC and first responders on behalf of his family, which was a victim of the Davis Fire. He expressed amazement at how the Northern Nevada community united in times of tragedy. He remarked there were support groups and organizations that reached out and offered aid to his family. He noted he had three young children who were impacted by the loss of their home. He declared he had to purchase all new clothes, school supplies, and other things to help his children feel safe again. He
thanked the Board and stated his family was grateful for the outstanding members of the community.
Chief Deputy County Clerk Cathy Smith advised the Board she received one emailed public comment, which was placed on file.
Manager Brown announced that day was National Voter Registration Day and urged anyone who was a Washoe County resident but was not yet registered to vote in the County to register. He recited locations where that could be done. He said the transition to the Voter Registration and Election Management Solution (VREMS) being implemented by the Secretary of State’s (SOS) Office was off to a good start. He advised election reports, processes, and voter lists were being audited. He noted it was an opportunity for people who had implored the County to clean up the voter rolls to look at all the data files and ensure they were as they should be. He said the process was underway, and the Registrar of Voters (ROV) Office was now focused on getting familiar with the new system so they were prepared to properly train vote center workers and expanded ROV staff on how to use it. He pointed out that the ballots had been proofed and were at the printer. He shared that candidates were able to proofread their own entries on each ballot. He informed sample ballots were scheduled to be sent on October 7. He mentioned sample ballots would contain arguments for and against the passage of all seven questions on the ballot, which ballooned the size of sample ballots to 80-100 pages. He described the new ballot sorter would allow for faster ballot processing, and was expected to arrive September 30 for training. He said the ROV was planning an open house on or near October 10 to showcase the new equipment in the office for the public and the media. He added they planned to have the ROV at the next Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting.
Chair Hill stated staff from Emergency Management were present to recognize another County department. She noted the Davis Fire was reaching full containment. She welcomed Emergency Management Administrator Kelly Echeverria.
Ms. Echeverria advised the request for time to present at a BCC meeting predated the Davis Fire. She thanked all community partners who collaborated and worked with Emergency Management to respond to and support the community. She recognized the Washoe County Library System as a fantastic partner with Emergency Management. She described that Emergency Management constantly worked to improve their processes and procedures, and they looked for an efficient and effective location to send people for information. She said most emergency incidents were fast-moving, so people typically just needed a place to wait out an incident, find information, and feel comfort. When thinking of those goals, libraries automatically came to mind for her. She advised that she contacted Library Director Jeff Scott, who supported her vision. She listed four separate incidents during which libraries were set up as resident evacuation centers and said it had worked phenomenally well. She remarked that library staff took the goal of providing comfort to heart. Ms. Echeverria revealed an award that bore a message of gratitude to the Washoe County Library System for disaster support in 2024. She felt librarians were superheroes
to Emergency Management and the community and observed that libraries facilitated easy and fast setup of services needed during emergencies.
Mr. Scott thanked Ms. Echeverria for her words and expressed his own gratitude to the library staff. He said all library staff members demonstrated their willingness to step up when they needed to. He provided examples of staff staying beyond usual opening hours at libraries to set up evacuation centers for multiple fires in 2024. He cited excellent planning and cooperation as major factors in the success of the operations.
Vice Chair Herman shared a quote about the conditions necessary for free and fair elections. She determined that action from elected officials to protect the rights of their constituency was an essential component. She shared that she dreamt of doing that but sometimes felt discouraged. She talked about the resolution shared by earlier public commenters, and affirmed she would sign and return it. She thought the resolution should be taken to the Board on a future agenda where it could be voted on. She felt everyone should work together to make a better County.
Commissioner Garcia thanked the firefighters, law enforcement, and military, specifically the National Guard. She extended her sympathies to the families who lost their homes and to everyone in the community who experienced loss during the crisis of the Davis Fire. She also thanked the families of the firefighters who went out to work the lines, law enforcement who left their homes to provide support, and military personnel from all over the United States (US). She acknowledged that the families who stayed at home sacrificed a lot so that public safety could be first and foremost. She asked everyone to join her in a round of applause to demonstrate gratitude.
Commissioner Garcia shared that the prior Sunday marked a historic day in Sun Valley. She described the opening of a newly renovated Sun Valley church, Our Lady of Guadalupe. She affirmed the importance of community spaces, regardless of denomination, ethnicity, or political background. She opined that gathering spaces in neighborhoods and communities provided connection, hope, and an opportunity for people to gather. She stated the project was the most significant church expansion in Washoe County and reported capacity was increased from 200 parishioners to 800. She disclosed a
$5.5 million gift for the renovation, predominantly from Mr. Tom Dolan, who she noted died just days before the grand opening celebration. She extended her condolences to the Dolan family and thanked all the donors who made the church expansion possible. She thought it was a beautiful example of what happened when people came together as a community.
Commissioner Andriola said she was moved by what Commissioner Garcia shared and did not think people understood the philanthropic generosity of Mr. Dolan, not only for Our Lady of Guadalupe but also in many other places. She thought most people did not even know about the church and thanked Commissioner Garcia for sharing.
Commissioner Andriola recognized County staff who organized the inaugural Walk with the FAM Awareness event to highlight the need for foster families in
the County. She said the event was held the prior Saturday at the Sparks Marina and helped increase awareness of the extensive need for foster parents in the community. She hoped people would feel inspired to consider opening their homes to foster or adopt a child. She noted FAM stood for foster, adopt, and mentor, and there were opportunities for everyone to contribute. She encouraged people to go to the Washoe County Human Services Agency (HSA) to see how they could help.
Commissioner Clark spoke about his attendance at the FAM event. He felt it was very well done, and he was proud of the work done by the County to set it up. He said he was also proud of the firefighters and first responders for the way the Davis Fire was handled. He referred to concerns expressed by a public commenter, Mr. Matthew Wilkie, regarding properties incorrectly categorized as high-cap and low-cap. He noted the Community Homelessness Advisory Board (CHAB) was canceled the prior week, and he questioned how much of the decision to cancel was informed by a press conference of someone visiting Reno who was running for office on the national level. He thought canceling County business when there was a quorum was outrageous and cautioned against prioritizing photo opportunities above community meetings that needed to be conducted. He echoed the preference of Mr. Wilkie to hold CHAB meetings regularly.
Commissioner Clark understood there was a recent death at the Cares Campus and hoped to get information about that. He noted concerns raised by Mr. Paul White that day. Commissioner Clark claimed he was denied a tour of the Cares Campus for months and was told the denial was because it was a construction site. He felt if construction was a logical reason to deny a tour, then it did not make sense to allow hundreds of people to sleep, eat, shower, or live there. He thought Mr. White’s claims about weapons should be investigated to see if they were true. He said it was a County facility, patrolled by the Washoe County Sheriff’s Office (WCSO), and he questioned whether having a no-barrier facility meant people could do whatever they wanted. He wished there were other no-barrier options in the County. He suggested Cares Campus residents be informed regularly that WCSO personnel might walk through with metal detectors, drug- sniffing canines, or both, specifically around the grounds, where he understood weapons were buried. He did not advise that people be harassed, just informed that they might be in violation of some laws if they kept drugs or weapons in the facility. He wanted an item on the agenda to ask the WCSO to patrol that area occasionally.
Commissioner Clark spoke about Mr. Nicholas St. Jon. He thought the BCC was played by somebody who wanted attention. He discerned that Mr. St. Jon got the attention he was looking for, and though he did not agree with the actions of Mr. St. Jon, he also disagreed with the time and resources consumed in response to Mr. St. Jon that day. Commissioner Clark determined that if it was legal to stand in the back of the building, it was also legal to stand in the front of the building. He said as long as Mr. St. Jon was not hollering or making wild hand gestures, he would have let him stand there until he tired of standing. He thought part of the job of being an elected official was hearing things you did not like and learning how to deal with or ignore them.
Commissioner Clark recalled comments from Ms. Trista Gomez regarding District 2. He expressed irritation that he was elected by one-fifth of the County but could not get anything on the agenda. He said Vice Chair Herman experienced similar problems in her district for a number of years. Commissioner Clark observed the majority of the Davis Fire was in District 2, which was his district, and although the Chair went to the incident and made a presentation, he was not invited. He felt his voice was being taken away, and he stated his intention to start holding town hall meetings in District 2. He said he was looking for locations and would invite people from District 2 to talk about whatever they wanted to talk about for three minutes. He described the meetings would be filmed and posted online, including on YouTube. He mentioned he had asked for town hall meetings in Chambers or buildings in District 2, but his requests were denied. He noted those spaces were citizen-owned. He determined the County did not want him to hold those meetings, and the District Attorney (DA) also advised him against holding them. He said he was going to hold the meetings because he wanted to hear what people had to say and bring those messages back to the dais to share their concerns. He stated it did not matter what he thought, but it mattered what the people in his district thought. He noted an election was coming up, and he hoped people would step forward and do the right thing.
Chief Deputy District Attorney (CDDA) Mary Kandaras made a statement for the record regarding the incident from earlier that morning. She asserted case law was very clear that a governing body had an interest in conducting the people's business in an orderly manner free from disruption. She declared the First Amendment was not absolute in a public meeting, which was well-recognized federal law. She clarified that Mr. St. Jon was not asked to leave the meeting because of the content of his speech but rather because he was stating that his exhibit had to be viewed a certain way, and he then insisted on standing at the front of the room in a way that blocked the view of others along with the view of the DA. She said he was disrupting the meeting, which he was repeatedly asked to stop doing, and he argued. She stated there had been issues with Mr. St. Jon before, and the government was interested in conducting a public meeting. She offered that if people wanted to protest, they could go outside. She said people could criticize within Chambers, but not in ways that disrupted the meeting. She added the clarification for the record in the event that there was a complaint. She asked Chair Hill to confirm that she also found the conduct to be disruptive and in violation of Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 203.119. Chair Hill affirmed those statements were true.
Commissioner Clark noted that many people watched BCC meetings online, and the disruption and subsequent recess might not have been broadcast. He summarized that Mr. St. Jon objected to the angle from which his public comment was being filmed and shown. After his public comment, he stood by the rail at the front of the room, which Commissioner Clark conceded might have blocked the view of CDDA Kandaras. He opined standing was not protesting in his world, especially when standing was permitted in other parts of the building. He thanked the WCSO deputies, who he thought responded well to the situation, though he theorized they did not like to referee situations like that. He observed that Mr. St. Jon conducted himself similarly in meeting after meeting, and he discouraged Commissioners from taking the bait in the future. He suggested the best way to get through the disruptions was to let people throw their tantrums
and ignore them rather than engage with them. He clarified that if Mr. St. Jon were jumping up, cursing, or threatening, he would have supported seeking the assistance of the WCSO to remove him from the meeting.
County Manager Eric Brown summarized that on Saturday, September 7, 2024, the Crisis Action Team was activated. He said the process was initiated by Emergency Management Administrator Kelly Echeverria, who notified his office that because of the reports from first responders, it was appropriate to activate the Crisis Action Team at level two, which meant leaders of emergency response agencies would be convened in the Regional Emergency Operations Center (REOC) on Spectrum Boulevard in Reno. He reported the emergency protocol was to assess the situation, get updates from the front lines, and then decide on appropriate next steps. He described that on the afternoon of September 7, Truckee Meadows Fire Protection District (TMFPD) Fire Chief Charles Moore requested that the Emergency Manager and County Manager file for a declaration of emergency, which Manager Brown approved. He said Governor Joe Lombardo declared a state of emergency shortly thereafter. Manager Brown anticipated the state of emergency would end in the next couple of days, as the fire incident was in the final stages of being closed out.
Chair Hill sought verification that the Board was simply confirming the declaration of emergency, which Manager Brown affirmed.
There was no response to the call for public comment.
On motion by Commissioner Andriola, seconded by Vice Chair Herman, which motion duly carried on a 5-0 vote, it was ordered that Agenda Item 6 be ratified.
PROCLAMATIONS
Before reading the proclamation, Commissioner Andriola recognized the Nevada Center for Civic Engagement Program Director, Christine Hull, who hoped to have students at the meeting that day.
Commissioner Andriola read the proclamation.
There was no response to the call for public comment.
On motion by Commissioner Andriola, seconded by Commissioner Garcia, which motion duly carried on a 4-0 vote with Commissioner Clark being absent, it was ordered that Agenda Item 7 be adopted.
Community Reinvestment Manager Gabrielle Enfield conducted a PowerPoint presentation and reviewed slides with the following titles: Community Reinvestment Update; Overview; SLFRF Annual Plan July 2024; Washoe State and Local Fiscal Recovery (SLFRF) Reporting; Washoe County Use of Funds by Expenditure Category; Use of Funds by Expenditure Category; ARPA-SLFRF; ARPA-SLFRF: Timeline; Funding Status; Recommended Awards – August - September 2024; SLFRF – New Awards & Amendments (Sept 17, 2024); SLFRF – New Awards & Amendments (Reconsidered Sept 17, 2024); SLFRF – New Awards & Amendments (Reconsidered Sept 17, 2024) Continued; Washoe Opioid Abatement & Recovery Fund; Washoe Opioid Abatement & Recovery Fund: Funding Status; Washoe Opioid Abatement & Recovery Fund: Fund Distribution; Community Development Block Grant (2 slides); Sponsored Projects; Sponsored Projects: Discretionary Grant Facilitation & Assistance (3 slides); Federal Appropriations; Federal Appropriations – Awarded Projects; Federal Appropriations – Submitted Projects (no projects awarded); Federal Appropriations Submission Timeline; Federal Appropriations Award Timeline; Questions?
Ms. Enfield outlined that she would provide an overview of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) and Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF), Washoe Opioid Abatement & Recovery Fund (WOARF), Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), sponsored projects, which included Federal, State, and private grants, and federal appropriations.
Ms. Enfield reviewed the Community Reinvestment annual plan. She described that each year in July, a comprehensive annual plan was submitted to the County Treasurer on all of the activities that had occurred to date, as well as plans for the expenditure of any remaining funds in the following year. She displayed the Community Reinvestment website, where she advised quarterly reports were posted. She added that quarterly reports were submitted to the Treasurer on the last day of the month following the end of each quarter. She pointed out that the website also contained current and prior annual plans and a summary of each project, along with performance outcomes. She noted some of the expenditure categories in the plan differed from the categories used by the County in the Treasurer’s reports.
Ms. Enfield spoke about the current and future outlook of the SLFRF. She
informed that funds were implemented starting in 2021 and continued to be allocated for new projects and obligated for existing projects. She said the focus was now on final allocations and deobligations because some projects were completed under budget. She stated the obligation deadline was December 31, 2024, and all projects had to be appropriately obligated before then. She described that throughout the rest of the performance period, her team would monitor and report on all projects through the expenditure deadline of December 2026. She showed a chart of the use of County funds. She divulged that administrative costs were projected to close lower than originally budgeted. She noted that the numbers in her slideshow included items on the agenda for the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) to vote on that day.
Regarding the CDBG award to Gerlach, Ms. Enfield added that some project funding was also obtained from the State. She mentioned County Grants Administrator Connie Lucido had been very busy working with County departments and community organizations. She spoke about the upcoming Silver State Grants Conference planned for February 13-14, 2025, and recalled the success of a Silver State Grants Conference held in 2019, which was sold out with over 300 people in attendance. She said that although, for the first time, the County was not awarded Community Project Funds (CPF) for projects they submitted, they were going back to the drawing board and would submit more projects for the coming year. She suggested the Nevada Association of Counties (NACO) Legislative Conference in February 2025 would provide a good opportunity to speak with congressional representatives about projects and ideas.
Chair Hill thanked Ms. Enfield for her overview and asked Commissioners if they had input.
Commissioner Andriola thanked Ms. Enfield and questioned when the resubmittal would occur. She wondered if there was an opportunity for the Hidden Valley Regional Park wetlands project to be reconsidered.
Ms. Enfield reported she was told the Hidden Valley project did not fit into the eligibility categories. She said her team would look for additional federal funding opportunities, and there was also a possibility that eligibility categories would change. She stated Community Reinvestment would monitor the categories to evaluate what programs they could submit applications to. She divulged they had a consultant who assisted them with identifying and developing funding plans for federal grant opportunities. She affirmed they would look into opportunities for funding the Hidden Valley project.
Commissioner Andriola wanted an opportunity to talk to Ms. Enfield about some possibilities that had a federal crossover. She asked if project suggestions were made exclusively by the committee or if she could provide feedback to Ms. Enfield.
Ms. Enfield welcomed suggestions from Commissioners and said she was available to meet with them about potential projects. She advised it was possible to submit regional requests.
Commissioner Clark thanked Ms. Enfield for her presentation.
Chair Hill expressed her disappointment with the lack of funding for the Hidden Valley project. She thought Congressman Mark Amodei loved that project as well, and she hoped a way was found to support it. She mentioned the Washoe County Tahoe Transportation study commissioned by the BCC in 2021. She was glad to see the Safe Streets for All grant application included in Ms. Enfield’s presentation and asked if Washoe Tahoe transportation could be pushed up on the list. She described the study was complete, and the scope of work was clear, but capital funds were needed for the next step.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS – 9A1 THROUGH 9E1
period date signed - December 31, 2024; and if approved, authorize Comptroller’s Office to make the necessary budget amendments and retroactively authorize Sheriff Balaam to execute Modification #004 of grant award documents. Sheriff. (All Commission Districts.)
076-310-77, 076-371-09, 076-372-03, 076-381-23, 076-391-23, 076-391-
65, WCAD 37 - Spanish Springs Sewer Phase 1A, parcel: 089-323-04. Treasurer. (Commission District 4.)
Chair Hill asked if any Board members had questions or wanted to pull any Consent Items. Seeing none, she asked for a motion, which was provided by Commissioner Andriola. Commissioner Garcia seconded.
On the call for public comment, Ms. Julie Young spoke in favor of the amendments to short term rental (STR) permits outlined in Agenda Item 9B1. She informed that she started the process to obtain an STR, and perceived there was not enough County oversight of the process. She reported communication with County Planning and Building had been difficult, and she was especially concerned about the low-cap and high-cap designations. She divulged that she lived along the Truckee River corridor in Wadsworth and did not believe her property taxes were a fair reflection of her circumstances. She did not think someone like her should be compared to people with numerous rental units, and she suggested an additional cap of some kind be considered. She disclosed she was living below the poverty line, and she felt that it was inequitable for her to pay the same amount of money as someone who was making 700 percent more money than her. She mentioned her property was where the Great Basin Transmission Company gas pipeline would be, and she opined there had been no transparency between the County and any of the other public offices regarding that project.
Ms. Trista Gomez recalled an STR issue was the first reason she ever attended a Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting. She was concerned that some jurisdictions seemingly required no STR permitting fees, whereas Douglas County had a huge public opposition to STRs and had enormous permitting fees. She observed that Washoe County, even with the proposed change, had very high fees for STR permits. She thought that spoke to an inefficient process, and she questioned what drove that expense. She said she learned from Commissioner Andriola that there was a large number of STRs in Incline Village, and she pointed out that the nightly fee for those STRs was as much as the STR fee for a whole house in Spanish Springs. She advocated for a more equitable fee structure for STRs. She also hoped for better protection against long-term residents who caused damage to the property or refused to leave.
Chief Deputy County Clerk Cathy Smith advised the Board that she received one emailed public comment which was placed on file.
Vice Chair Herman wondered if Agenda Item 9B1 should be removed from the Consent Agenda and brought back after further discussion.
Chair Hill stated she was in favor of moving forward with the item because the changes proposed would address and improve the concerns people had expressed to the Board. She asked if Vice Chair Herman wanted a staff summary on the item.
Planning Manager Trevor Lloyd reviewed the proposed fee reductions. He also offered to discuss the additional fines proposed if that information was desired by any Board members. He said the proposed Washoe County Code (WCC) amendments included a fee reduction for property owners who claimed their property as a primary residence. He informed there would be a marginal $100 deduction for the initial STR permitting fee, and it would not apply to owners with multiple residences. He noted an additional $50 reduction was proposed for annual renewals.
Vice Chair Herman disclosed she was never fond of the STR program, and remained critical.
Commissioner Clark understood that the vast majority of County STRs were in the Incline Village area. He thought the one-size-fits-all approach did not work for people like Ms. Young who were trying to make ends meet with their rentals, whereas other people were renting out houses to make a profit. He questioned how the changes would help Ms. Young.
Mr. Lloyd replied that he did not know the details of Ms. Young’s situation, but he offered that if she were renting out her primary residence, she would receive a fee reduction that she could take advantage of.
Commissioner Clark asked Mr. Lloyd to meet with Ms. Young to review her situation, which he agreed to do. Commissioner Clark said he had a good sense of what was happening with STRs at Lake Tahoe, which was where most of them were, but he noted there were other STRs around the County that needed to be considered differently.
Commissioner Andriola thanked Mr. Lloyd and other staff who worked on the item. She stated it was clear that the majority of STRs were near Lake Tahoe, and she was interested in improving equity with that in mind. She thought using an income verification system for STR owners would create complexities. She appreciated the information about how STR rates in Washoe County compared to other areas. She recalled STRs were intended to be cost-neutral from a County perspective, but theorized that because of the time spent by staff the program likely did come at some cost to the County. She affirmed it did not generate significant income. She noted the County only received one-thirteenth of the STR fee because other entities in the community received the rest. She supposed more than 90 percent of STRs were near Lake Tahoe, and she perceived that the fees were inequitable between Lake Tahoe STRs and STRs in other areas of the County. She hoped for an equitable proposal but advised against too much complexity in evaluating different rates for different owners.
Commissioner Clark recalled an item regarding Tyrolian Village that went before the BCC, which he said he would review. He thought it cost the County a lot of money, and he remembered observing at the time that the County was losing money and making people mad. From a business perspective, he supposed Agenda Item 9B1 would cost the County a lot. He did not think the County should be in the business of property management. He asked if anyone in the County Planning and Building department had an STR, real estate license, or property management permit. He thought it was important for people to have experience in the areas where they created policy.
On motion by Commissioner Andriola, seconded by Commissioner Garcia, which motion duly carried on a 5-0 vote, it was ordered that Consent Agenda Items 9A1 through 9E1 be approved. Any and all Resolutions or Interlocal Agreements pertinent to Consent Agenda Items 9A1 through 9E1 are attached hereto and made a part of the minutes thereof.
BLOCK VOTE – 10 THROUGH 12
There was no response to the call for public comment.
On motion by Vice Chair Herman, seconded by Commissioner Garcia, which motion duly carried on a 5-0 vote, it was ordered that Agenda Item 10 be approved, authorized, and directed.
There was no response to the call for public comment.
On motion by Vice Chair Herman, seconded by Commissioner Garcia, which motion duly carried on a 5-0 vote, it was ordered that Agenda Item 11 be accepted, authorized, and directed.
There was no response to the call for public comment.
On motion by Vice Chair Herman, seconded by Commissioner Garcia, which motion duly carried on a 5-0 vote, it was ordered that Agenda Item 12 be deobligated and directed.
Commissioner Clark asked what would happen with the deobligated funds in Agenda Item 12.
Community Reinvestment Manager Gabrielle Enfield spoke about the placement of the deobligations on the agenda, which were intentionally put before the other two agenda items that provided allocations to new projects. She said the deobligation amount was included and considered in the calculation of allocations in Agenda Items 13 and 14. She expected, as she mentioned in her presentation, that there might be more deobligations in the future, which would be brought to the Board. She said they would then look to make other allocations, but there was no list of new projects. She explained the deobligation in Agenda Item 12 was distributed in the next two items on the agenda that day.
Commissioner Clark asked if the funds would be held in a separate account of some type rather than the general account.
Ms. Enfield advised that as funds were allocated, they were moved out of the general unallocated component of the budget and into an internal order. When funds were deobligated, the process was reversed.
Chair Hill summarized the deobligated funds that were recommended for expenditure in Agenda Items 14 and 15, which Ms. Enfield confirmed. Ms. Enfield said that if all items were approved that day, the balance remaining to be allocated would be
$407,264, as identified in her presentation in Agenda Item 8.
- Veterans Services to support the enhancement of the Health Care for Homeless Veterans (HCHV) residential program by integrating Veteran Service Officer (VSO) positions and expanding the Clinical Coordinator’s behavioral health support; provide essential services to homeless veterans, focusing on securing veterans' benefits and addressing substance use and behavioral health issues in the amount of $150,000 and approve Resolution R23-193 2. Sun Valley General Improvement District to support projects consist of sealing and striping of the parking lot, walking paths, and basketball court at Highland Ranch Park. This will also support purchase and installation of security cameras at Gepford Park, and picnic benches, in the amount of $60,000 and approve Resolution R23-194 3. Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe - Gerlach Fire Services to support cost coverage of the hourly cost of firefighting employees of the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe through provision of two firefighters (EMT-A or Paramedic) 24 hours per day, 365 days per year located in Gerlach to perform initial fire and emergency medical services, in the amount of $200,000 and approve Resolution R23- 195 4. Public Defenders Paralegal Program to support Washoe County Public Defender and the Alternate Public Defender’s offices to hire temporary paralegals, in the amount of $80,000. 5. Community Spay & Neuter Project, to support the operation of a public high-volume, high- quality spay/neuter program at the Nevada Humane Society (NHS). This funding will support a program aiming to perform 5,000 surgeries within the first 12 months of operation and grow to 7,000 surgeries the following year. This volume of low-cost surgeries will effectively reduce the number of unwanted animal births annually in our community in the amount of
$750,000 and approve Resolution R23-196 6. Rancho San Rafael Community Events Space Phase I, engineering, design, and site prep only for an open-air multi-purpose stage and community events space for performances, and educational programs, in the amount of $1,000,000 7. Recruitment Incentive, to amend the existing award by $15,000 for a total
amount of $165,000. The Washoe County Recruitment & Retention Incentive Program is used to assist with the recruitment and retention of employees in difficult to fill positions in the County that are impacted by a shortage of qualified labor in the region. This additional funding is to cover the additional employee incentives that were not initially included in this program. And, if approved, direct the Comptroller’s Office to make necessary net zero cross-fund and/or cross-functional budget appropriation transfers. Manager’s Office. (All Commission Districts.)
Commissioner Garcia stated she supported the initiatives in Agenda Item 13 and had questions about Subitem 5.
Chair Hill advised that staff should address the Commissioners’ questions before public comment so that public commenters would be aware of any new information.
Commissioner Garcia thanked Community Reinvestment Manager Gabrielle Enfield for her hard work. Commissioner Garcia mentioned she had been serving on the Washoe County Regional Animal Services (WCRAS) Advisory Board for over one year and was one of its many representatives. She noted that the board was advisory in nature, and her service gave her the opportunity to become familiar with various organizations’ missions and outreach efforts. She asked Ms. Enfield to explain how the work with the Nevada Humane Society (NHS) in Subitem 5 began and evolved. Ms. Enfield stated the project in Subitem 5 was identified as a community need by a County department and through work with Assistant County Manager (ACM) David Solaro. She added that the project was identified as a need across many organizations. The project’s direction and scope were focused on determining specific needs and establishing an organization with the capacity to implement the program. She said the program was very specific and included a veterinarian and a mobile spay and neuter vehicle, so identifying an appropriate organization was deemed the most cost-effective way to implement the program. Commissioner Garcia inquired if the mobile animal surgical hospital (MASH) unit already existed. Ms. Enfield advised that the unit was being upgraded. She offered to have the grantee elaborate on the project’s scope of work and implementation plan.
Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the NHS, Ms. Jerleen Bryant, explained that surgeries would be implemented and administered in various ways. The NHS had an established onsite medical clinic that staffed approximately 25 employees, which was how all the animals in its care received medical attention and surgery. Through the proposed grant, additional spay and neuter surgeries would occur at the clinic and inside the mobile spay and neuter vehicle, a large van with special equipment. She remarked that a MASH clinic was an impressive sight and clarified that it was a temporary popup hospital that utilized big tents in the facility’s parking lot to perform many surgeries in a short amount of time. For example, 800 animals could receive surgery in a four-day period, making MASH clinics extremely effective. She noted that MASH clinics were successful but not easy because they required a specialized team and well-versed staff members. She cited her experience with MASH clinics at the Maui Humane Society and said they benefited the community.
Commissioner Garcia asked if MASH clinics had historically been utilized in the community. Ms. Bryant did not know if they had been used in Washoe County. She explained that the NHS had a robust spay and neuter program in prior years, facilitated through the NHS’s onsite clinic and mobile spay and neuter vehicle. She advised that the NHS was seeking a multipronged approach; it was interested in providing animal sterilization services in underserved areas to people experiencing various challenges, such as transportation.
Commissioner Garcia inquired how active and productive the NHS’s current mobile clinic services were. Ms. Bryant informed that the NHS was not currently using its mobile spay and neuter vehicle. Commissioner Garcia asked how long the vehicle had been out of operation. Ms. Bryant responded that it had not been operational since she began working at the NHS, and she was unsure how long before that. She reported that most animal shelters nationally discontinued public spay and neuter services during COVID-19 (C19). She stated she recently inspected the mobile spay and neuter vehicle, which was in good shape and functional.
Commissioner Andriola asked if the NHS would provide matching funds. Ms. Bryant said the NHS would provide funds because the cost of surgeries would exceed the $750,000 grant amount. She specified that there would be a small fee for services provided to publicly owned animals, but far less than charged at a clinic. There would be no cost to other animal welfare organizations that utilized the associated vouchers as long as the animals were from Washoe County.
Commissioner Andriola expressed appreciation to Ms. Bryant for mentioning the vouchers and asked her to further elaborate on the voucher system. Ms. Bryant clarified that any surgeries performed using vouchers would be completed by the NHS. The vouchers would be distributed to other animal welfare organizations, who could use them for free animal sterilization services.
Ms. Bryant pointed out that a portion of the grant funds would allow the NHS to reinstate a program that previously existed. The NHS could continue the program when the grant funds were exhausted at the end of 2026 because it would have the equipment and staff in place. She emphasized that the grant funds would be a jumpstart for the community and the program. The NHS did not intend to discontinue the program after the grant funds were exhausted.
Commissioner Clark questioned if the vouchers could be used at other animal care facilities, such as private veterinary practices, and if the NHS would reimburse those facilities if that were the case. Ms. Bryant replied that the NHS was not exploring that option, and she added that the program’s details were still being ascertained. The NHS wanted to ensure the program benefitted the community and other animal welfare organizations. She explained that the NHS would not provide a voucher for use at private clinics because that would not improve the community’s situation, as the cost would be too high. The voucher could be used at the NHS, and there would be no cost if the voucher holder were an animal welfare organization. For private animal owners, there would be a
low monetary cost, far lower than at private clinics. This allowed the NHS’s program to remain sustainable.
Commissioner Clark asked if the NHS could potentially run out of capacity if the program became extremely successful. He questioned if a lottery system would be used and how the priority of service delivery would be determined. Ms. Bryant responded that a scheduling system would be used, similar to their current system but with a lower volume. Appointments would become available in various ways, and scheduling would depend on how the surgery was administered. If the surgery was performed at the onsite clinic, an appointment could be booked online. For a MASH clinic, individuals would call the NHS after scheduling opened up. She stated that scheduling for the mobile spay and neuter vehicle would depend on the situation. The vehicle would be driven to a particular zip code, where its presence would be publicized to let the area’s residents schedule appointments. She believed there was a large demand for the program’s services, and she assured that the number of surgeries would not create a backup.
Commissioner Clark asked if preferential treatment for low-cost spay and neuter services would be given to seniors or seniors on fixed incomes. Ms. Bryant explained that the NHS did not have that detail delineated, but it was always available to help the community, especially community members who faced challenges like financial and transportation difficulties. She noted that situations of that nature were not unique, and the NHS encountered them daily.
Commissioner Clark pointed out that Ms. Bryant mentioned transportation challenges multiple times. He asked Ms. Bryant if a partnership with the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) had been considered. He remarked that the RTC utilized vouchers, Uber rides, and Lyft rides for various community members. He inquired if the NHS coordinated with the RTC so it did not have to travel to everyone, and individuals could utilize public transportation methods to travel to the NHS using discounts or vouchers. Ms. Bryant commended Commissioner Clark’s suggestion and commented that the NHS was open to incorporating it. She stated that the NHS’s large mobile spay and neuter vehicle was equipped to leave the NHS facility and visit under-resourced communities to address the needs of animals there. She acknowledged that the community had a variety of needs; if there was a singular need for someone to transport their animal to the surgery, the NHS was open to all options that incorporated that need.
Commissioner Clark felt it might be more effective to have the RTC transport individuals to the NHS rather than the mobile spay and neuter vehicle traveling throughout the County. Ms. Bryant agreed and specified that the strategy would depend on the need. She said that type of need was not uncommon and shared that many communities, animal shelters, and humane societies had mobile units. She advised that mobile units were an effective way to address the needs of a particular area that potentially had a large number of animals that needed sterilization. She stated that 30 surgeries could be performed at the designated location without needing ongoing transportation back and forth, which was different from an individual, such as a senior or veteran, who just needed assistance with transportation.
Commissioner Clark asked what type of animals the program included, to which Ms. Bryant replied that it was for cats and dogs only. She noted that the community and the Country had experienced an overpopulation crisis, primarily with cats and dogs. Commissioner Clark confirmed with Ms. Bryant that goats and sheep would not be eligible. Commissioner Clark inquired if people could claim they experienced discrimination if their animals were not eligible. Ms. Bryant explained that large animal veterinarians performed specialized surgeries on other various types of animals, but the veterinarians at the NHS did not. She added that NHS veterinarians performed surgeries on small animals. Commissioner Clark pointed out that guinea pigs and rabbits were considered small animals. Ms. Bryant agreed and said those animals would not receive surgery in a high- volume setting.
On the call for public comment, Ms. Tracy Dean was not present when called to speak.
Ms. Andrea Carasali provided documents, copies of which were placed on file with the Clerk.
Pyramid Lake Fire Rescue and Emergency Medical Services (PLFREMS) Fire Chief Don Pelt, on behalf of the PLFREMS staff and the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe, thanked the Board for the continued support that allowed them to assist the wonderful people of Gerlach, Empire, and Vya. He stated that, like in the military and law enforcement, people in the fire service enjoyed showing appreciation to those who helped them. To reward those actions, they issued challenge coins. He announced that their 2024 challenge coin featured the six communities the PLFREMS program provided services to: the tribal communities of Nixon, Sutcliffe, and Wadsworth, and the communities of Gerlach, Empire, and Vya. He asked if he could approach the dais to present each Commissioner with a new 2024 challenge coin in gratitude for their support. Chair Hill thanked Chief Pelt and advised him to approach the dais.
Ms. Penny Brock stated that Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund (SLFRF) money was meant to support the citizenry. She announced that she researched the funding distribution guidelines and learned they advised avoiding the creation of new programs or adding on to existing programs that required ongoing financial commitment. She questioned if Subitem 4 met the guidelines, which emphasized investment in critical infrastructure. She felt the program in Subitem 5 appeared to add to an existing program; she asked how it would be funded and asserted that it did not support private business. She stated that Subitem 6 allotted money to the Rancho San Rafael Regional Park. She inquired about the South Valleys Regional Park, stating it was still largely undeveloped. She thought it should be developed for many important reasons that included improved useable space for children, dogs, grandparents, and parking. She said she was told it would cost $100 million to develop. She spoke about Subitem 7, a recruitment incentive. She questioned why funds would be allocated to the County’s budget when it already had a substantial budget of over $1 billion. She acknowledged that some people might not think that was a substantial amount. She declared that $15,000, as listed in Subitem 7, would go a long way towards developing the South Valleys Regional Park.
She posited that certain subitems would not meet the guidelines, which could be reported to the United States Department of the Treasury or a similar agency in Washington, D.C., that wanted to ensure the funds were used appropriately. She did not discover the guidelines until August, after which she felt many items should not have been awarded SLFRF money. She requested that the Board reconsider Subitem 7 and possibly Subitems 4 and 5.
Commissioner Garcia informed that she was still considering Subitem 5 and was curious if other Commissioners had related comments. She appreciated the NHS’s vision of bringing MASH clinics to the region and reinstating its mobile spay and neuter vehicle. She explained that overpopulation was a nationwide issue, as was a shortage of veterinarians and veterinary technicians. She added that surgery equipment was expensive and necessary for successful programs. She pointed out that the WCRAS recently hired a veterinarian, but it did not have its own equipment to conduct the surgeries, which she was hopeful would be forthcoming. She said the County’s overpopulation issue had been addressed through nonprofit and private collaborations. She had hoped for more detailed program information, such as eligibility requirements, partners, and voucher specifications. Her main consideration was whether the Board should expand the capacity of one nonprofit organization or expand the capacity of organizations that already performed the associated work. Commissioner Garcia said she spent time examining correspondence and communicating with her constituents to help answer that question. She noted that the NHS was one of the County’s partners and needed to be a healthy organization to support the WCRAS’s tasks. The County relied heavily on the NHS and their successes were intertwined. She said there were leaders in the County that had not discontinued spay and neuter services since C19. She remarked on the availability of options, such as veterinary care and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) of Northern Nevada. She was unsure about bolstering one County partner when other organizations had successfully performed the associated work.
Chief Deputy District Attorney (CDDA) Mary Kandaras advised that Commissioner Garcia’s comments could be considered, but the Board was to address the obligation of funds, not where the funds might alternatively go. She reminded that the Board’s consideration was to either approve or deny the agenda item.
Chair Hill asked Commissioner Garcia if she desired to table Subitem 5 until more information was obtained or until staff could confer with the County’s other partners to bring additional options to the Board. She noted that a deobligation of funds might occur and mentioned the possibility of the Board assisting other organizations, the likelihood of which was unknown.
Commissioner Garcia inquired if the topic would be deprioritized during the next round of funding if Subitem 5 was denied. She asserted that was not her intention and affirmed the community had a crisis. She did not want to risk the topic’s dismissal by tabling Subitem 5. Chair Hill advised that Commissioner Garcia could either make a motion, ask that any deobligated funds return to support an alternative priority or request to table Subitem 5 until further pertinent work was completed. Chair Hill pointed out that the funds had to be obligated by December.
Commissioner Garcia wanted to table Subitem 5 and approve all other subitems. She requested that staff reexamine Subitem 5 and prioritize it during the next round of funding.
Commissioner Clark supported the Public Defender’s (PD) Office. He wanted to ensure it received proper funding in the County’s next budget to strengthen its staffing. He felt the PD’s Office did outstanding work yet was understaffed and underfunded.
On motion by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Clark, which motion duly carried on a 5-0 vote, it was ordered that Agenda Item 13, with the exception of tabled Subitem 5, be approved, authorized, and directed. Any and all Resolutions or Interlocal Agreements pertinent to Agenda Item 13, with the exception of Subitem 5, are attached hereto and made a part of the minutes thereof.
coverings, solar panels, ADA compliant doors and furniture to enhance therapeutic experience for all participants in their facility, in the amount of
$305,000 and approve Resolution R23-180 7. Courage House, to support Courage Worldwide bringing a Courage House to Northern Nevada supporting victims of sex trafficking and offering the most vulnerable children a refuge with trauma and survivor informed residential therapy, award will support purchase of a property in Washoe County where services will be provided in the amount of $250,000 and approve Resolution R23-
178 8. Truckee River Rangers, to expand the consistency of patrols, programming, and citizen engagement along the Truckee River Corridor in the amount of $200,000 and approve Resolution 23-177 9. Northern Nevada Literacy Council, to support the continuation of the work of providing literacy programs and career pathways for 40 adult learners ages 16-24 leading to career pathways with sustainable living wages, in the amount of
$100,000 and approve Resolution 23-179 10. Rebuilding Together Northen Nevada, to support 20 households to be pre-qualified with home repairs and a site feasibility project in Gerlach, in the amount of $75,000 and approve Resolution R23-183 11. Family Respite Care of Nevada, supporting children residing in Washoe County who are in foster or post-adoption care, in the amount of $50,000 and approve Resolution R23-182 12. Tahoe Area Regional Transportation, in support of another year of improving alternative transportation options compared to personal vehicles and reducing congestion and improve traffic flow by reducing vehicles on the road, in the amount of $400,000 Manager’s Office. (All Commission Districts.)
Commissioner Clark stated he asked for the item to be reconsidered. He recalled that the Clerk prompted him to enter his vote at the previous hearing of the item, but he was on the fence about some of the projects. He opined some of the projects in the list were desperately needed in the community, but he was uncertain about others. He remarked that since that meeting, he had been in constant communication with members of the public regarding the best use of the County’s funds and noted the conversations mainly concerned the Seven Magic Mountains (SMM) art installation. He declared that many people enjoyed art. He said he was a member of the Nevada Museum of Art and hoped he would not be banned from the facility. He asserted that his issue was ensuring the best use of the County’s funds. He thought the constituents did not believe the County should spend the money requested for the SMM project. He pointed out that art was in the eye of the beholder, and not everyone saw things as art. He recalled that it was brought up numerous times that the SMM was a great tourist attraction and wondered if there was any evidence to back those claims. He opined that if the SMM was a tourist attraction, the Reno-Sparks Convention and Visitor’s Authority (RSCVA) should contribute some funding to the project. He stated he would happily vote on the other project in the item but believed the SMM should be removed from consideration.
Vice Chair Herman agreed with Commissioner Clark’s comment and said she would not vote for the item if the SMM project were included.
Commissioner Andriola remarked that the SMM project had many unknown factors, specifically details about how to get the piece to Washoe County. She thought Mr. David Walker did a great job citing the economic resources that the globally recognized project could be to the community. She noted that she had visited the SMM and praised the artwork. She asked if there was a way the Board could place contingencies on the SMM project, to which Chief Deputy District Attorney (CDDA) Mary Kandaras responded that the Board had to either approve or deny the agenda item.
County Manager Eric Brown explained that, as with all ARPA projects, if something went wrong and the provider was unable to perform under the terms of the agreement, the money for the project would go back to the County and could be reallocated in the fashion that Community Reinvestment Manager Gabrielle Enfield mentioned in Item
13. Commissioner Andriola responded that time was running out for ARPA allocations. She asked Mr. Walker what he believed was a realistic timeframe to get details such as the location, project partners, and any outside funding needs.
Mr. Walker stated he had been working with Ms. Enfield and believed the project could have an established direction by December. He noted that the artist needed to travel from New York to look at potential sites for the piece. He expressed the desire for the SMM to be relocated to Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribal Land. He recalled meeting with the Tribal Council, who was receptive to hosting the art piece. He asserted that the economic benefits were evident, as it would be like having Burning Man year-round to some extent. He declared that funds would not need to be expended for another six months, but he needed a sense of whether there was a realistic direction for the project. He pointed out that he was also pursuing other sites for the SMM in Southern Nevada. He thought it was interesting that residents of Northern Nevada were so opposed to allocating funds to the SMM because the exact opposite sentiment was present in Southern Nevada. He remarked that Las Vegas residents were upset that the SMM needed to be relocated. He informed the Board that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) buried a counting device in the pathway to the SMM to collect data about the number of visitors to the art installation, so the numbers he reported were accurate and not made up. He pointed out that the Nevada Museum of Art was working on a $60 million investment to update its facility and had raised $57 million. With that ongoing project, he asserted it was not a good time for him to get into a complicated or difficult situation with the community about the SMM project. He declared that he had been involved with the SMM for over ten years and was deeply vested in the project, but the piece did not belong to the museum. He reported that the SMM was a proven driver of tourism and revenue, but if it was something he needed to fight over for the next six months, it was not a good time for him to do so. He said he would continue to answer questions about the SMM’s value and opined that bringing it to Northern Nevada would be great. He recalled a previous commenter who claimed they could re-create the SMM for $100,000. He remarked it cost $150,000 to repaint the piece every two years. He stated there was a lot of misinformation and strong feelings in the community that did not favor the project, but he thought it was an investment in something that would attract people to the region for years to come.
Commissioner Andriola thanked Mr. Walker for his information. She asserted that if any roadblocks emerged against the project, Mr. Walker should immediately communicate with Ms. Enfield. She pointed out that the ARPA funds had to be expended by December 2026, so if something went wrong with the SMM project, Ms. Enfield needed to be made aware so a different project could be funded. She reported receiving a lot of feedback from her constituents, some supporting the project and others against it. She was hopeful to hear that the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe was interested in hosting the piece.
Commissioner Clark stated he supported the museum and pointed out that the BCC had supported it with other donations. He asked that the Board vote on the other projects in the item and table the SMM project for a later meeting because he wanted to address any misinformation in the community. He opined that the SMM project should be separate so people could voice their opinions and get educated about it.
On the call for public comment, Ms. Penny Brock stated that Northern Nevada differed from Southern Nevada. She remarked there were struggling families and seniors in Washoe County. She recalled a public comment from a senior who had to open their home to short term rentals (STRs) so they could afford their property tax bill. She thought the taxpayers were concerned because they noticed so many other needs of the people in the community. She believed the community would be more welcoming to the SMM if other things were adequately funded. She expressed the desire for the South Valleys Regional Park to be developed. She asserted Washoe County did not have extra money to spend on rocks, regardless of how famous they were in Clark County. She asked if the BCC knew that Clark County allocated $50,000 per year to the SMM for maintenance and wondered where similar funding would come from if the project moved to Washoe County. She asserted that, according to the requirements of the ARPA funds, necessary maintenance would disqualify a project from obtaining funding. She thought it would be wise if the Board continued the item to a later meeting to allow more public comment opportunities.
Mr. Cliff Nellis alleged that seniors were the target of the pandemic. He opined that the money slated for the SMM project should be allocated to the Washoe County senior community. He mentioned plans for the SMM to be located on Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribal Land and spoke about increased recreation fees at Pyramid Lake. He wondered if the Tribe would ever elect to charge an entrance fee to visit the SMM. He opined the SMM was not a good project for the community because it was just painted rocks. He believed he could recreate the piece for a lot less money. He recalled that his daughter received a quote to have her house painted for $40,000, but he was able to do it himself for $500, so there were always methods to do things cheaper. He recommended that the Board follow Commissioner Clark’s suggestion and table the SMM project to allow for more public comment.
Commissioner Clark opined that a better use for the funds dedicated to the SMM could be conducting an evacuation study for Incline Village in the aftermath of the recent Davis Fire. He recalled a County spokesperson who mentioned that the County did
not have the funding to create an evacuation plan for Incline Village. He asked the Board to vote on the other projects in the item and bring back the SMM project for further consideration at a later meeting.
Commissioner Andriola thought Ms. Enfield did a great job following the guidelines for the ARPA projects. She believed everyone had ideas they wanted funding consideration for, and she expressed the desire for a shooting facility at Golden Eagle Regional Park. She noted that Mr. Walker was clear about his commitment and understanding of the project’s deadline and that he would inform Ms. Enfield if there were issues. She pointed out that while Southern Nevada differed from Northern Nevada, there were still opportunities to host the SMM in the north. She asserted there was nothing that obligated the County to repaint or pay for any maintenance for the SMM. She said if the project fell through, the money would go back to the County, giving opportunities to fund other projects.
On motion by Chair Hill, seconded by Commissioner Garcia, which motion duly carried on a 3-2 vote, with Vice Chair Herman and Commissioner Clark voting no, it was ordered that Agenda Item 14 be approved.
Chair Hill opened the public hearing.
Chief Deputy County Clerk Cathy Smith read the title for Ordinance No.
1732, Bill No. 1921.
Chair Hill reminded the Board the item had been discussed previously and asked if they preferred a staff overview since it was a second reading. She recognized it did not appear the Board needed an overview. Chair Hill thanked the planning and community service teams for their hard work on the ordinance. She referenced the many adjustment recommendations made since 2021 when the matter was first adopted by the Board. She said the Lake Tahoe community had been promised adjustments over time, and she felt staff had listened. She believed the planning and community service teams listened to the feedback from the community and the other Commissioners and made effective amendments that benefitted the second reading. She expressed that short term rentals (STRs) were relatively new; therefore, adjustments would continue to be made as needed. She portrayed gratitude for the planning and community service teams’ willingness to adapt and change as needed to protect the community. She said the commonsense regulations would prevent burdens on the community.
Commissioner Andriola expressed gratitude towards the planning and community service teams.
There was no response to the call for public comment.
On motion by Commissioner Hill, seconded by Commissioner Andriola, which motion duly carried on a 3-1 vote, with Vice Chair Herman voting no and Commissioner Clark absent, it was ordered that Ordinance No. 1732, Bill No. 1921, be adopted, approved, and published in accordance with NRS 244.100.
Ms. Penny Brock expressed concern regarding voting integrity due to a report from Townhall on September 12, 2024, that stated Michigan and Nevada faced election integrity lawsuits from the Republican National Committee (RNC). She referred to a lawsuit from the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) against Cari-Ann Burgess, interim Registrar of Voter (ROV), regarding the allowance of voter registration at commercial addresses. She stated an additional lawsuit was filed in Clark County under the same reasoning and that PILF won its hearing regarding commercial addresses not being sufficient for voters’ registration. She questioned why nothing had been heard in Washoe County. She did not understand why a judge would not hear the case. She indicated the RNC, the Grand Old Party (GOP), and a State voter had filed a lawsuit against the Secretary of State (SOS) for allowing non-citizens to vote despite Nevada’s regulations against it. She conveyed that history showed non-citizen registration had worsened in Nevada; however, due to administrative failures, it was difficult to understand the full scope of the issue. She communicated concerns regarding non-citizens voting in the 2024 general election and said data showed 6,360 individuals were listed in the DMV’s non-
citizen file. She relayed that 3,987 of the previously stated individuals had cast a ballot in the 2020 general election. She reviewed a tweet from RNC Chair Michael Whatley referencing clean voter rolls needed for election integrity to begin, and she said Nevada was an example of this need due to every active voter receiving automatic mail ballots. She expressed that fair and honest elections and clean voter rolls should be desired. She did not understand why secure elections were not strived for at the Registrar of Voters (ROV).
24-0658 AGENDA ITEM 17 Announcements/Reports.
There were no announcements or reports.
* * * * * * * * * * *
2:41 p.m. There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned without objection.
ALEXIS HILL, Chair
Washoe County Commission
ATTEST: