[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[3:43] Order, miscall please. Good morning. It's a surprise or jominger. Surprise or white. Supervisor Harden. Supervisor Shitty. Mayor of Agwell. You got your quorum. Thank you so much. We're now on to agenda item three, which is our invocation. And I think Pastor Lou is here to enlighten us this morning.
[4:12] Thank you. Let's pray. Thank you, Lord, for this day and for your many blessings in our lives. Lord, I pray for our supervisors.
[4:21] If him discernment in making just and wise decisions,
[4:25] may their discussions be fruitful, their actions just,
[4:29] and hearts be aligned with your will.
[4:32] May we be reminded of the words of the prophet Micah,
[4:35] which are, he has shown you, O man, what is good,
[4:39] and what does the Lord require of you,
[4:42] but to do justice, and to love mercy,
[4:45] and to walk humbly with your God.
[4:47] Please bless the men and women of this board, their families and staff, give wisdom that they may govern well.
[4:56] Be asked for your continued grace and blessing for the people of our...
[5:00] Community, in Jesus' wonderful name, amen.
[5:04] Thank you so much, Miss Adams. Would you do us the honor of leading the pledge?
[5:10] What is the plan?
[5:13] The plan?
[5:13] The plan?
[5:15] The plan?
[5:20] In the digital?
[5:21] With liberty?
[5:22] Dr. Carl.
[5:23] Thank you so much.
[5:25] Okay, we're now onto our opening public comment.
[5:29] those requesting to speak at the beginning of the meeting. I have a Raymond
[5:35] Robert Schell signed up first.
[5:51] I'm Raymond Laura Schell from Christ and City.
[5:53] I'm here today to speak in opposition to proposed acquisition of a new city hall
[5:59] that's neither appropriate nor something that the people of Christ and City can afford.
[6:03] The proposal comes about because city clerk's organization needs the move out of the courthouse
[6:10] to make room for a third justice course.
[6:16] There are plenty of properties available around the city clerk's side of the city clerk requirements
[6:20] without resorting to a huge expense of a new city hall.
[6:24] We do not need 45,000 square feet structure and pocket structure to house city services.
[6:29] That figure is almost double what is currently utilized by city employees.
[6:32] It appears that you want to find a way to justify this oversized structure because that's what HMAF wants to build.
[6:40] Are there detailed plans available for this building?
[6:42] If so, I haven't even shared with the public.
[6:45] What are you trying to hide?
[6:47] The city manager has stated that the ground bigger could occur as early as much, 2027.
[6:52] I'll get a new construction began without detailed plans.
[6:55] Are we buying a peg in a poke?
[6:58] This building includes fiber optic wiring throughout.
[7:01] If you did, they have telephones, there was a better.
[7:05] The proposed lease cost is listed as the estimate of $1,964,000 per year.
[7:11] This number is a bit of a sham in high-sits root cost, so this chip on that,
[7:15] at least because it does not include the primary taxes.
[7:17] In torrential utilities, maintenance, it's not a mobile cost,
[7:20] which a city would be on the hook for.
[7:23] We're about the cost of moving off city employees in the distance structure.
[7:27] That isn't cheap.
[7:35] Commercial moves are even more expensive than moving household. Who's going to pay for that?
[7:40] That tooth fairy?
[7:42] This is supposed to be hauled, includes an amount of terremics,
[7:45] some sort of justification for the increase in square footage,
[7:47] but we don't need a new amount of terrem.
[7:49] We are perfectly good when right here in this building.
[7:52] This total sales still has additional redevelopment funds to partially fund Mr. City Hall.
[7:58] We desperately need redevelopment funds to spur new commercial development
[8:01] and increase tax base using redevelopment funds for new City Hall
[8:04] just dumb and dirt like cutting off your nose despite your face. As further evidence of the
[8:10] short-sighted thinking of this proposal is the proposal stale of the existing city hall to the state.
[8:16] How much the state pay in taxes to the city? About zero. Any sensible proposal would include a
[8:22] sale of this property to a commercial customer to introduce tax base. After all, it's prime downtown
[8:26] property. It would surely bring a little bit price and yield added taxis. Every bet helps. In summary,
[8:32] this new city hall for Colville's based point where it's shaky, falls in incomplete fiscal
[8:37] estimates that just don't hold water. We don't need it to get afforded and we need to stop it now
[8:42] before you add this community into inevitable bankruptcy.
[8:48] The next individual that I have signed up
[8:51] for speaking at the beginning is Mark Costa.
[9:08] Good morning. My name is Mark Costa, Carson City resident
[9:12] and property taxpayer. Please vote no on the City Hall lease purchase item 14A and against
[9:23] the City Hall garage item 15B and let the people vote on it. Many people skilled and
[9:30] experience in lease and accounting have voiced objections and problems with this proposal.
[9:36] Listen to them and heed their advice.
[9:39] The voters should be allowed to decide on this project.
[9:43] There is a precedent for allowing the voters to decide.
[9:46] The voters decided on the two row repair initiatives in 2024.
[9:51] The voters decided on the proposed public library initiative,
[9:56] which was approximately 15 years ago.
[9:58] Therefore, the voters should...
[10:00] On the other side, if they want to be obligated for nearly $2 million per year for $30 million city hall over 30 years, costing over 30 years, in 8 million for an unneeded parking garage. There are many other areas in Carson City that need investments. The Board of Supervisors has been told about the excuse me.
[10:28] The climbing pavement condition of the local roads and the finance department has reported
[10:36] capital investment is needed for equipment and buildings.
[10:41] Also as an example today's agenda is the purchase of 15 vehicles for almost one and a
[10:49] half million dollars as an example of other expenses which are coming due.
[10:55] Plus, there are associated costs with the City Hall, including furniture utilities, information
[11:01] technology, property taxes, and insurance, which are not accounted for and not funded.
[11:07] These expenses are not budgeted.
[11:10] How will these expenditures be paid for?
[11:14] Finally, many details for this project are not resolved or have been transparent to the
[11:20] public.
[11:20] The basic question is why is this city home needed when there are other options and other
[11:27] buildings that have not been explored or adequately analyzed?
[11:32] Vote no on this measure and present this project to the voters for their decision.
[11:38] Thank you.
[11:39] Thank you.
[11:40] The next one I have is Scott Drake.
[11:45] Sorry, I always go in order for the sign-ups and then I take general after.
[11:49] Thank you.
[11:54] The people of Spoken. My name is Scott Drake, I'm a resident. The people of Spoken
[12:01] flock must go. Now, today, a digital cage has been dropped around us. Suddenly, we bear
[12:08] the soul-crushing weight of our own captivity. A literal cage of fear, distrust and resentment
[12:16] planted into our lives at our expense without accountability. In conflict to establish norms
[12:24] with entirely suspicious timing. It's not just flock, it's all the dangerously invasive surveillance,
[12:31] many players, many serious problems, from the dire erosion of trust, personal security,
[12:38] national security, to the no less than the functioning democracy itself. This is not a choice to be made
[12:45] for us, nor a acceptable semblance of representation. We have our own examples of dangerous backlash
[12:51] for a hero ready. The camera's urgently replaced, but the burn marks and scarred lives remain.
[12:59] Please, hear this one example and take it as a pivot point.
[13:03] reintroducing the term the flying hot list. It's already well-defined. It describes a line of
[13:09] democracy not to be crossed. The hot list itself moves or flies to the device. No physical
[13:15] possibility of public data ever stored or moved from the device, a strict, verifiable,
[13:22] hardware separation. Hot lists in real democracies do not ever store public data. However,
[13:28] oppressive dystopian pre-crime tools should do. The line did not move. It was blatantly and intentionally
[13:35] disregarded. The public does not trust flock, axion, Tyler, Cognite, Palantir, or the rest of them,
[13:44] nor should we, and most importantly, for this room, nor should we need to.
[13:52] In summary, 30 days continuously is forever over the line.
[14:00] The real hot lists do not collect
[14:03] public data in a democracy. That's just not how they work. I can continue. Shall we explore the
[14:10] un-serious bug bounty programs or something else on the long list of well documented offenses?
[14:16] Thank you for your time, and I am available for further deconstruction.
[14:25] I have, sorry if I don't read the last name correctly here, but is there a richer
[14:32] curing?
[14:35] I've got your last name wrong, because I can't read your writing, but that's okay.
[14:53] Good morning, a richer chain, Carson City resident,
[14:58] good morning.
[15:00] I want to address the proposed city hall project, but not just the building. This is about a $64 million
[15:09] financial commitment that taxpayers will carry for decades. The construction cost is quoted at
[15:15] $30 million, but earlier this year, the city's own analysis contemplated in amortization schedule
[15:23] of approximately 64 million. I understand the CFO has suggested that figure is conservative,
[15:32] that is exactly my point. The public deserves to know the full cost, not just the sticker price,
[15:39] and this brings me to a serious question of public participation. In 2012, Carson City voters rejected
[15:46] a quarter cent sales tax for the no good project by 68 percent. After citizens gather thousands
[15:54] of signatures demanding a public vote, the city adopted an ordinance bearing public funding for
[16:01] that project without voter approval. The city now says that ordinance may be unenforceable
[16:07] and unique to that project. My question is, if the principle was right then, why isn't it right now?
[16:16] And what is the public's guarantee that we get anything beyond a city hall?
[16:22] The foundation now says the promised public plaza will only be built if the hotel in garage
[16:28] Generate enough profit.
[16:29] And if not, they'll ask the public to pay for it through brick sales and bench naming.
[16:36] So we are being asked to commit 64 million for building while the public benefits keep shrinking.
[16:43] Now consider the timing.
[16:45] We are debating this when the 30 year treasury yield is above 5%, substantially higher than the short-term policy rate.
[16:55] If rates remain elevated, taxpayers pay more.
[16:58] If construction costs increase, taxpayers pay more.
[17:02] Calling this, no new taxes does not mean taxpayers aren't paying for it.
[17:07] It means the money is being deverted from roads, infrastructure, public safety, and reserves.
[17:13] I'm not saying Carson City should never build a new city hall.
[17:17] I'm saying we must absolutely be certain we're building for the right reasons,
[17:23] the right price under the right financing,
[17:25] and we must have a clear plan B before committing to a project this fluid
[17:29] because taxpayers deserve a backup plan before they are left holding the bag.
[17:34] I respectfully ask this board to slow down,
[17:37] preserve public participation, give taxpayers information they deserve
[17:41] before this becomes a commitment, they cannot be undone.
[17:46] Thank you.
[17:49] I don't have anyone else signed up for the beginning of the meeting,
[17:53] but you may come up.
[18:03] Thank you very much, Mayor Denny, French Carson City, Nevada.
[18:07] I, as many may know, try to get to as many minors as I can.
[18:12] When I do come and decide that I have learned something
[18:16] that has changed my perspective or such, I adjust my remarks.
[18:20] And this circumstance, I can't add to what's already been said any more eloquent and distinctly as has been on the 16th that the public has already advised you of and made you alert of and have you considering.
[18:37] But I would like to add these things. Having failed being able to come up with anything fresh or new or feeling confident I could even express it, I've come up with several things.
[18:47] I look to people like the philosophers.
[18:50] I look to Martin Luther King,
[18:52] Dolly Lama,
[18:55] Confucius,
[18:56] Will Rogers and Mark Twainis,
[18:58] to what constitutes good communication.
[19:02] First off, I'm not a good example,
[19:05] but I do show up and I do listen,
[19:08] and I do observe your responses,
[19:11] and this is where I have from them.
[19:14] And this is from a movie it's called Cool Hand Luke.
[19:22] The captain says, what we've got here is a failure to communicate.
[19:30] Then you go down to Hannah Obdert, the meaning of honest communication,
[19:36] the meaning of honest communication relies on a shared agreement about a base truth.
[19:43] losing that foundation destroys meaningful public discourse.
[19:51] Marcus taught us a way back there.
[19:57] Clarity of thought is...
[20:00] The most must be clarity for speech, meaning you can't articulate and ideal clearly to others if you don't understand it yourself.
[20:12] And I honestly do not feel that we have resolved those issues of understanding on a foundation of a basic truth.
[20:22] We are only animals given the great communications that humans have only to use it to fight instead of connect.
[20:36] That's by any how I can't read his name because my glasses aren't on.
[20:42] Martin Luther King says, wrong word, even in right message, could create a ripple of chaos.
[20:49] And you learn quickly to analyze your words in consistence with each of the breaks.
[21:00] Well, watch what you say and how you say it, basically.
[21:04] Clarity always focus on a clear, simple core message.
[21:10] This has not been the case I do not believe here.
[21:13] I don't believe it's with intent to do harm, but I feel that it's done as me, a great deal of pain and caused me angst.
[21:24] I care about everybody on this board while I don't agree often with you, and I seldom want to have to step in when I do agree.
[21:33] Because I don't want their name attached to mine necessarily.
[21:37] Thank you, Mr. French. Thank you.
[21:42] Betsy. Betsy Straussburg, Carson City resident, Madam Mayor and Supervisors. First, I like to find out why this Board of Supervisors meeting is not at 6pm after people have left their day jobs, especially with a public notice about the city hall on August 22.
[22:04] Why did the board revert back after the July 16 meeting to a day meeting when people
[22:11] can attend?
[22:13] The second question and it may be for the folks who design the agenda, the motion on the
[22:21] redevelopment fund at the July 16 Board of Supervisors meeting said, and I code, and further
[22:28] we have a validation of the availability of the redevelopment funding as a resource.
[22:33] We expected that validation to be presented at the next possible meeting when the city hall was going to be discussed.
[22:43] Instead, we saw in the legal notice a vague term called legally available funds.
[22:51] What does that mean?
[22:53] Or is it because the homework hasn't been done yet?
[22:56] And therefore, the city has not provided the answer that the mayor requested at the July 16th meeting.
[23:07] Should the public watch all future meetings just to stay informed on what that legally available fund means, which fund?
[23:18] And how will it be used to fund the new city hall?
[23:22] When we pull the public in various locations, we find that many of them do not know about the city hall and the parking structure.
[23:36] Why is that?
[23:38] Yes, they are busy with their lives, but it is up to the city to get them informed as you did.
[23:45] about clearing weeds from the sidewalks and common ownership areas as well as maintaining the private water storm facilities and where e-bikes can travel.
[24:00] I urge the city to disclose all due diligence, work that has been done on the City Hall and parking structure as it has been requested by the public and not use the developer documents before any decision is made, especially when the city is the applicant of this requirement.
[24:26] Thank you so much.
[24:28] I don't. Again, I don't have any else signed up, but if, uh, oh, sorry. I might have. And if there's others, come on, uh, let's just try and get this moving along. Good morning. Mayor Supervisors. My name is my eighth essentially resident candidate for Supervisors here in Ward 3. That gives me anxiety. I don't want to reiterate many of the comments here. It's lovely to see everyone here. The engagement, the discourse that we're having around these different
[24:57] projects. I just wanted to make a couple.
[25:02] Acknowledgements, I suppose, and then ask a few questions in front of you. Maybe y'all can consider asking them later on today while you're having these conversations around these topics.
[25:13] One, just the irony of the order in which the agenda is listed today, given what we're talking about with the ordinance and all that, it made me chuckle.
[25:21] I wanted to ask a couple of questions about the off-ramps, I know that I've heard discussion
[25:26] in the right a bit about the off-ramps that have been documented or partially documented.
[25:32] I was curious when the city refers to these off-ramps in this proposed agreement, what specifically
[25:38] are those off-ramps? And when can they be exercised? Or when there might be an anticipation
[25:44] to exercise them? Because again, that will really reflect interest that the city is paying
[25:51] as well as that anger-tenant situation. I think that has been discussed in regards to maybe
[25:57] the further private development after a city hall is built. And what it would cost the city
[26:02] to exercise those off-ramps, just curious, land ownership. I wanted to see if we could confirm
[26:10] with the least purchase when paid if paid or brought out early, whether or not Carson City will
[26:17] still receive that fee simple ownership of both the city hall building and the underlying
[26:21] parcel free and clear of any in conferences also curious about easements, once the city owns
[26:27] that property, what easements access agreements, parking obligations, maintenance agreements or
[26:31] other restrictions will continue to tie the city own property to the surrounding hub and may
[26:36] development as it proceeds. And then also curious about the financial plan, some of those assumptions
[26:43] again around the off ramp conversations, looking at the redevelopment funds as that second bucket
[26:50] expires in 2036 whether or not we're looking at exercising the off ramp before or after
[26:57] those redevelopment funds expire upon completion of the construction. Yeah. Thank you.
[27:07] Sandra Owens. I want to speak to the items when you call a man, but this
[27:12] The report is about to make a generational, a generation long decision on Thursday morning before a holiday weekend.
[27:18] Instead of giving the public the same courtesy, it gave the deal on July 16th.
[27:23] On July 16th, you have an evening meeting so people could get off work.
[27:26] Today at 830 in the morning, two days before Labor Day, that is not how you hear a city.
[27:31] That's how you get through a vote.
[27:33] When you say you already heard from the people, look at who spoke in favor in July 16th.
[27:38] A lot of that support came from people with the stake in getting this built, and from letters that I read, they came off from the same template.
[27:46] A stack of matching letters is not a town. It's an organized yes. The city manager sits on the board of the N and NDA, that in Northern Development Authority, as Carson C, which is also housed in a hop and may add a foundation building.
[28:00] Before this job, he ran for the, or he ran the Nevada Builders Association, the Builders lobby.
[28:08] That is the world those templates came from.
[28:11] It's not from the people who will still be writing the checks in 2057.
[28:15] Those people are at work this morning.
[28:17] They were promised a voice 14 years ago.
[28:20] You can still put this on the ballot.
[28:22] If you will not, at least do not pretend that 830 hearing in the,
[28:26] the eve of a holiday is the same thing as asking them.
[28:29] Thank you, Mr. Stevens.
[28:35] Karen Stevens through the record.
[28:38] I would like to come in the previous speakers for their comments.
[28:44] I agree with them completely.
[28:47] That I want to talk about flock camera during this moment of time.
[28:53] I sent some questions to supervisor Giyomi.
[28:58] Last month, I didn't receive any response nor a formulator like this being sent out on the city hall.
[29:06] But I want to say that I also concur with Mr. Drake regarding everything you said about these cameras, their evaluation of our constitutional rights.
[29:19] And just because it's a technology that's available to law enforcement doesn't mean it should be used when it violates our Fourth Amendment rights.
[29:32] It's very disturbing.
[29:34] This technology is being gathered against us.
[29:40] People are saying here that it's only kept for 30 days.
[29:44] Well, maybe that's correct, locally, but flood camera keeps it indefinitely, and it's
[29:52] out to any law enforcement agency like the FBI or the CIA, or people with deep pockets
[29:59] See you next time.
[30:00] Court, or other organizations that spy on the people. So, this data is being kept indefinitely, and whether you're committing a crime or not, we don't know what crime is going to be made up about us.
[30:18] and come up after us for some weird reason.
[30:24] So I think that these cameras should be taken out.
[30:27] I know we're paying somewhere around $35,000.
[30:34] For each camera per year, is that a good use of our money?
[30:39] I certainly don't want my tax funds being used to spy on me.
[30:44] So that's what I have to say about that.
[30:46] and I will talk to you later, Mr. Nagle.
[30:51] Good morning, Richard Nagle for the record.
[30:54] What bothers me about this building is the fact
[30:56] that it's got a 30-year lifespan
[30:58] according to the stuff that I read that was available.
[31:03] And why are we building a building?
[31:05] If it's only got a 30-year lifespan,
[31:10] we don't usually maintain buildings.
[31:13] So it may be even less, but my question is if we're gonna,
[31:18] put this kind of money into something, should it last a little bit longer than 30 years?
[31:26] Thank you.
[31:29] You have to, you have to push the button to greet.
[31:32] Thank you.
[31:33] Connie Solerno, I'm a Carson City resident.
[31:36] I'm not a public speaker in any way shape or form,
[31:41] but I feel compelled to speak now for the second time
[31:44] at a meeting regarding the city center project.
[31:48] When I spoke last, I did ask that your work be shown with the experts analysis reports as to why this is the most feasible option compared to all the other options you mentioned, which were renovating other properties and so on.
[32:08] I have seen none of that, and now I am disturbed when I read the agenda item, I believe it's 15B.
[32:21] Number four, Adams CC development has proposed a construction time frame, et cetera.
[32:28] Adam CC development has been an existence only since August 6th, 2026, less than 30 days ago.
[32:41] This was never a company.
[32:44] So I'm wondering how they are as it says here.
[32:53] The party appears to have undertaken significant preparatory work
[32:57] And then it's in a unique position to best provide the most desirable partnership with the city.
[33:06] How could that have been done in less than 30 days?
[33:12] That's my question.
[33:14] And also I do believe that this should be put to the vote of the citizens of Carson City.
[33:20] Thank you.
[33:22] Do you have anyone else on opening the public come?
[33:26] Okay, I'm going to move on. Then we're going to go to agenda item six, which is the approval of our minutes of August 6.
[33:34] Do I have any corrections or changes?
[33:36] For many member. Supervisor Geomea motion, please.
[33:40] To approve Board of Supervisors meeting minutes is presented for the 6th of August 2026.
[33:46] In a second for approval, all those in favor, please.
[33:49] I, I, any opposed, say no. Let the record reflect that was unanimous.
[33:56] We'll now move to our consent agenda.
[33:59] Supervisor G. Omey.
[34:01] To prove the consent agenda consisting of item 7A, 8A, 9A, 10A, 11A, 12A and 12B, all is presented.
[34:11] Have a motion in a second for approval of the consent agenda.
[34:14] All those in favor, please say I, I, any opposed, say no.
[34:19] Let the record reflect that was unanimous.
[34:22] We'll now onto agenda item 14A.
[34:26] This is discussion and possible action
[34:29] on a resolution dealing with the lease purchase agreement
[34:32] in a maximum aggregate principle amount of 30 million
[34:37] directing the clerk recorder to notify the
[34:40] Carsity Dept Management Commission
[34:41] and directing staff to afford necessary materials
[34:47] to the Department of Taxation.
[34:49] Ms. Benabu.
[34:51] Good morning.
[34:53] First, I'd like to respond to Supervisors'
[34:55] White's questions from the July 16th, 2026 Sports of Supervisors Meet.
[35:00] The rules from NRS-2,
[35:05] yes, sorry. The rules from NRS-279, read by Mr. Mr. White, were referencing redevelopment agency debt, and how that debt cannot have a life past the life of the agency.
[35:17] Interest 279 is for the redevelopment dead.
[35:23] This means purchase agreement is a financing type that is funded by all legally available resources of Carson City.
[35:31] This is not redevelopment dead.
[35:34] A redevelopment area one plan is a legally available resource.
[35:40] As Section 411C specifically states that with the approval of the Board of Supervisors,
[35:45] The authority may pay all or a part of the value of the land construction of any building facility structure or other improvement.
[35:56] Thereof.
[35:57] Using these legally available funds will allow the city to bridge the gap between 2029 and 2031.
[36:05] After 2031, the redevelopment area 1 sunsets, the general fund starts paying off some of its long-term debt.
[36:12] And the city will shift the payments to the general fund as the primary legally available source of funding.
[36:20] So it's just a funding source that we're using redevelopment area one for.
[36:25] Area two funding will be reserved for incentive still owed.
[36:31] The city is asking for at least purchase agreement, which is different from a bond in that it does not pledge any specific revenue source.
[36:40] but relies on all legally available sources of Carson City.
[36:46] The first step in this process is the authority to take the least purchase agreement to the
[36:50] debt management commission for approval and the State Department of Taxation.
[36:55] These two entities are required to determine if there is adequate funding to proceed.
[37:01] Note that the final least purchase agreement will come back in October and November for two meetings for
[37:08] final approval if we are approved through these first steps.
[37:13] It's the in cities intention through this process to own both the land and the building.
[37:20] It is also the city's intention to refinance this least purchase agreement as soon as
[37:24] feasibly possible with the geobond or revenue bond as we have stated several times.
[37:31] The city got a better deal than the original off ramps.
[37:34] The city staff successfully negotiated no pre-payment penalty for the least-purchase agreement.
[37:41] Meaning if you pay off your car, your home today, you would owe just a little bit of interest
[37:45] accrued as well as the amount still owed.
[37:51] Which is actually a great deal that we got for the city better than offerings.
[37:57] So with that statement, I'll turn the discussion of the least-purchase agreement approvals over to
[38:02] John Peterson with JNA. He's our debt consultant and Ryan Henry from TAFT, who's our city
[38:08] bond council for their comments, and then we can, you know, turn back to you guys.
[38:14] Thank you. Good morning, Mayor and Board of Supervisors, John Peterson with JNA Consulting
[38:19] Group for the record. I would, I believe the way the agenda item is laid out. It does call
[38:25] for a public hearing. And then a discussion. So, Mayor, I guess I would ask with the concurrence
[38:32] of your council that we opened up the public hearing first and then have further discussion.
[38:42] So, I'm okay with either direction, generally speaking, though, for the public to be able to, I feel
[38:51] to have a good discussion and comment with us that they would like to understand the underlying
[38:56] documents first, and then I'll open up the public hearings so we can have a discussion
[39:02] if that makes sense.
[39:04] I think they're interested in listening to components and then they would be able to have
[39:10] a discussion.
[39:12] I understood it, and maybe I'll lean on Ryan Henry, I guess what I would say is that the
[39:18] the value of statutes are kind of specific that the hearing's first, but this is
[39:23] why it's area more than mine. If I need to open it, I'll open it. And you're part
[39:27] of the public hearing? Yeah, public discussion. Do you see that too? Okay. Yeah, I can do that too.
[39:34] For the record, Ryan Henry from Taft Law, as John mentioned, the statutes are
[39:39] specific on this and that authorization resolution shouldn't be deliberated on and
[39:45] voted upon until after the public hearing occurs in his close, but I do think it's fine to have further discussion here so long as you take public comment during the public hearing and then close it prior to the to the boards deliberation on the actual resolution.
[40:01] I don't have any problem opening the public hearing. So I think you're part of the public record anyway for the discussion. So I will open the public hearing and then we'll just all be a part of that and then we'll close it at the conclusion. So the public hearing is open.
[40:23] Okay. So I'll start with a few questions. Just sorry. Sit down. You're not leaving. I think that what I'm really interested in and I think this dynamic that we just had about the law and processes.
[40:41] I think oftentimes it's difficult for those that don't deal with debt financing and lease purchases on a regular basis in every day to understand the steps and the processes and the order.
[41:02] And so what I'm really interested in is the resolution itself deals with pain for many legal
[41:13] source. And so I would love if you could discuss that because I think people in the public
[41:20] were expecting potentially to see it more lined out. You know, I'm going to get X from this source
[41:27] and why from that source, can you explain to us why it's written in the manner that it is?
[41:36] John Peterson, J&A Consulting Group for the record, Mayor, it's an excellent question.
[41:40] The reason it's written like this is to provide flexibility to the city.
[41:43] So when we talk about this process and issuing debt, it requires that we're having this
[41:49] presentation today, the vote by the board later, the public hearing, but one of the components of
[41:57] entire discussion is, it has the city identified a funding source. And so in order to make that
[42:03] funding source to the city as broad as possible, the words that are used are legally available
[42:08] funds. So that would include, for instance, the general fund of the city. That is legally available
[42:14] to pay for this obligation. I think as CFO Russell Benavu was just talking about with the redevelopment
[42:21] agency that would also fall under that umbrella of all legally available funds.
[42:26] If I'm getting more into the weeds, you know, if, for instance, the utilities department
[42:31] took up an, you know, an entire floor of city hall, that would mean that under some, you know,
[42:36] a cost allocation program that some of that cost could be paid, you know, proportional
[42:41] cost could be paid out of the utilities fund.
[42:43] So again, it's not meant to obfuscate.
[42:45] It's meant to provide as broad of a base for the city to pay this from as possible.
[42:50] Ultimately, at the end of the day, the expectation is that the general fund will kind of be the ultimate, you know, for lack of a better word, backstop to pay this obligation.
[43:02] But that is how I would classify this all legally available funds discussion, and I know Ryan has some comments as well.
[43:10] Perfect. Thank you so much. Yeah, for the record Ryan Henry from from Taft Law. So one thing I just would like to put on the record is under NRS chapter 350, the least purchase agreement constitutes an installment purchase agreement now under Nevada law installment purchase agreements are payable from all legally available funds.
[43:28] The important distinction I want to make is that no specific revenues are pledged to this repayment of the lease purchase agreement, which is subject to annual appropriation.
[43:38] So just as John described on a year to year basis, the city can choose to do appropriate repayment from whatever funds at that point in time are legally available and, you know, ready to do so.
[43:52] And, you know, it's the same thing with medium term obligations under Nevada law, medium term obligations and installment purchase agreements are both payable from legal available funds.
[44:02] And that's what taxation is going to look at as part of its review of this process and it looks at the affordability.
[44:08] And so for that reason, the notice of public hearing and the authorization resolution were both drafted in the manner John described for flexibility.
[44:17] You know, and it would be, you know,
[44:20] on necessary might be the wrong word, but inappropriate to get too specific in those documents
[44:26] because like I said, no specific revenues are pledged to the repayment of the obligation.
[44:31] Thank you so much.
[44:33] And then can you tell me one of the discussion points that we've had is the ability for us in this particular
[44:45] endeavor is off-rabs or really no pre-payment penalties. And I think that what I'm
[44:53] interested in is this board or not actually the board, but the staff has been a
[44:58] over there, and you guys...
[45:00] You're our bond councils. Would be watching the bond rates to anticipate that, okay, we can do this for a better price, we can get out the interest rates.
[45:13] It behooves us to refinance this debt. I kind of look at it that way. Just like you do in your own mortgage at home, right? You watch rates, you watch things that are going on.
[45:22] And you would be alerting us that, hey, let's, let's refinance this debt because there's a better pricing model out there.
[45:33] Would we have to go through this process again to go to the Department of Taxation because it's a different vehicle or a timeline.
[45:41] I just, I just want that process. So would we go again?
[45:46] John Petersen, Jane, a consulting group, Mayor just kind of back up on some of the statements
[45:51] you were making earlier.
[45:53] Yes.
[45:53] Right now, we are anticipating that there would be the ability for the city as was mentioned
[45:58] earlier.
[45:59] The city can prepay this thing without a premium or penalties kind of the word that is normally
[46:06] thrown around in my business.
[46:09] You can pay it basically with a crude interest, just like you would prepay your mortgage.
[46:12] Now, the source of that prepayment could be, you know, the city could have cash on hand and could pay that with cash.
[46:20] You know, just just throwing out some options of how it could prepay, obviously that eliminates the interest cost.
[46:26] The other options that you're alluding to of a refinancing through issuance of other bonds.
[46:31] Potentially, yes, there was a process.
[46:33] There are requirements in Nevada law for how those bonds can be issued.
[46:37] In the past, the city has issued what we call general obligation of revenue bonds.
[46:41] That was what we did for the, the John D. Winters Park for those improvements.
[46:46] That process requires a, it's kind of a lengthy process requires about 90 days to authorize those kind of bonds.
[46:53] It does require that we go back or go to the debt management commission.
[46:58] Here in Carson City for approval of those bonds.
[47:01] So in that scenario, yes, we would have to go to an outside entity.
[47:04] We would not go to Department of Taxation.
[47:06] Another refinancing opportunity that exists for the city would be to issue revenue bonds.
[47:12] Now these are bonds that are payable strictly from a pledged revenue most likely for the city that would be the consolidated tax.
[47:20] Revenue bonds do not require approval of an outside entity.
[47:24] Examples where the city's done revenue bonds in the past is we've done bonds that have been paid with the fuel taxes to improve roads.
[47:32] We did not go to the Det Management Commission, we did not go to Department of Taxation for those kinds of bonds.
[47:37] And if we were to do revenue bonds to take this out in the future, we would not go to those outside agencies as the laws written today.
[47:46] Legislature can always change the rules, so I want to put that down on the record.
[47:51] But as they are today, that's those are a couple of the options.
[47:54] One, yes, we have to go to the Det Commission.
[47:56] One, no.
[47:56] And then just another question in general because we read all the public comment, all the stuff that has come in.
[48:09] Part of the discussion point is some in the public believe we're not being honest on the cost of the facility.
[48:18] And so, why is only the principle noted, you know, instead of 60 million or fully amortized,
[48:28] and all of that kind of stuff that it talks about the principle amount only?
[48:33] So, is again, why is only the principle noted in the document instead of focus?
[48:40] John Peterson, JNA Consulting Group for the record, as far as the resolution is concerned,
[48:44] It mentions principle because Nevada law requires that we set a principle amount so it requires that we say 30 million obviously in the backup materials
[48:52] There is discussion about the the contemplated interest cost and that's that's in those materials
[48:58] But in terms of why the resolution says 30 million instead of 60 million. It's because we have to say principle
[49:04] Thank you very much
[49:06] Okay
[49:06] Does anybody I don't see either hands raised so why don't we go to general the
[49:12] public hearing again is open, agenda item 14A.
[49:18] The first one I have signed up for that was Mr.
[49:21] Greedy
[49:26] and then if then Mr. Sonata and then Mr. Costa.
[49:47] Good morning.
[49:49] I have Michael Greedy, a voter in Carson City since 1986.
[49:54] Emotion to adopt the proposed resolution must be denied.
[49:58] this consider
[50:00] Federation for the proposed, quote, new city hall, violates the board's 16 July procedural motion to discuss
[50:08] the new city hall for two board meetings before taking action. The 16 July procedural motion
[50:15] requires validation if redevelopment funds can be used for the new city hall. This written
[50:22] determination has not yet appeared. The proposed resolution is for these participants agreement.
[50:30] The resolution is silent on the purchase conditions.
[50:35] The least purchase agreement must explicitly include
[50:38] the purchase conditions.
[50:40] The least purchase agreement may be for financing purposes,
[50:47] implementing at least purchase agreement is
[50:49] tantamount to completely committing to the proposed
[50:52] quote, new city hall, with design responsibility
[50:55] by the least soar.
[50:57] But the board must consider the ongoing operating expenses before committing to a new city hall.
[51:04] Taxes, the city is not exempt under a lease, utility cost, maintenance, and most importantly depreciation.
[51:15] There must be a two-week publication period if an actual lease purchase agreement is brought to the board for implementation.
[51:23] Customary one week agenda publication period is too short.
[51:27] A two week period will help the board members review and the public's review.
[51:33] Understanding a complex long term commitment is necessary
[51:36] avoiding any quote catch 22's.
[51:41] I urge each board member to read the previously submitted public comments.
[51:46] Similarly, a comparison to a mortgage pre-payment is false.
[51:52] A mortgage payee has an equity interest in the underlying property.
[51:59] In a lease agreement, there is no equity interest.
[52:03] If the board should choose to not appropriate lease payments,
[52:08] the board will have to vacate the city hall.
[52:13] I am generally not favorable to single issue judgments, but this new city held decision
[52:22] affects neighborhood street funding, potential other city services funding, and is a 30-year
[52:29] project.
[52:30] The Board's decisions here will affect the Board's credibility.
[52:34] Board members, Board members, votes will affect a Board member's future electoral success.
[52:42] Thank you.
[52:43] Thank you.
[52:45] Miss Sinata.
[52:48] Thank you.
[52:49] Mary Sinata.
[52:50] Carson City resident.
[52:52] This lease purchase agreement is a bad deal for the city.
[52:58] For your own consultants report, it states that this is the most expensive financing option.
[53:05] So you need to give some justifications.
[53:08] I've gone through your justifications, and I don't find them valid at all.
[53:16] Number one, it's better this lease purchase is better suited to meet your March 2029 deadline.
[53:26] And yet your own consultants report states that revenue bond authorization could be completed by October 2026,
[53:36] which is totally complex with this idea that we need this least purchase agreement.
[53:44] That it's necessary for the ownership structure.
[53:50] How, I don't understand that justification at all.
[53:57] The rest of the justifications that are stated relate to the palace and the parking lot project itself,
[54:05] not the financing. The justification stated for this most expensive financing option do
[54:14] not support the conclusion that it benefits the citizens of Carson City. In addition,
[54:22] the resolution contains many other strange elements including you're going to reimburse
[54:29] expenses from the proceeds,
[54:34] at least is an obligation to pay.
[54:38] It doesn't generate any proceeds.
[54:43] Has any real thought ever come into this?
[54:48] It was again mentioned today that we're going to wait
[54:54] for the interest rates to go down.
[54:58] This is a fantasy.
[55:00] Does anybody look at the bond markets? There's absolutely no indication that interest rates are going to go down, especially on long-term debt anytime soon.
[55:15] I urge the board to reject this resolution.
[55:20] Thank you.
[55:22] Do I have any other public comment?
[55:27] Please come up and take the chair.
[55:41] Sandra Owens for the record, so I've given the clerk a longer written comment and I'm not going to read that, I'm just going to go over the five things.
[55:52] So this is not a $30 million vote.
[55:55] The debt service schedule in your own packet is principal. We've already gone through that. It's a 54 million.
[56:03] $955 million vote, the payments will ask through the physical year of $2,000 or $257.
[56:10] That allows every person here on the dius.
[56:13] Let's just call it what it is.
[56:15] Two, your own advisor found cheaper ways to borrow.
[56:19] Janey said that geo revenue is at 4.6 revenue bonds at 4.8.
[56:26] this lease purchase puts us at 5% over 2 million or at about 2 million a year.
[56:31] GNA says the city can use either cheaper methods and those authorizations could be done by
[56:36] October 27th or January 27th, October 26th, January 27th, why authorize a more expensive
[56:42] structure and why didn't the comparison arrive after or why did the comparison arrive after July 16th
[56:48] and not before.
[56:53] We didn't get the, where's the, what you requested in your motion for July 16th
[57:00] for in writing that we would have approval for the redevelopment funds. For the deadlines yours,
[57:08] the ownership structure is theirs. Janae did not invent March 29. Janae wrote that the city expects
[57:15] occupancy by then, Sex and Chevin says, at least purchase is necessary for this owner structure
[57:20] because the foundation owns a land and wants to design control for its larger project.
[57:26] This is not the only way Carson City can have a city hall.
[57:29] The resolution also asks you to find no suitable.
[57:32] Find that no suitable seller exists.
[57:35] Another proposal by involving Bank of America,
[57:39] I believe has been presented. I was told this alternative should be put up next to this one.
[57:45] and until we do that, this finding is just not ready.
[57:50] Five, you need to put it on the ballot.
[57:52] You know, this statute may not be legally voted on,
[57:56] or it doesn't require a vote,
[57:58] but that's not the question.
[58:00] The question is whether five people, you five,
[58:04] should commit this city through 257 without one.
[58:08] No vote, I say vote non, put this on the ballot.
[58:11] It's the right thing to do.
[58:18] There we go.
[58:19] Connie Solerno, Carson City resident, I've heard the term legally available funding, but I would like to know if some of the funds are not legally available right now until you repeal the CCMC 2.44.010, that's my question.
[58:44] are as that public funding intended to be used for this project and right now it's not
[58:52] legally available because it's strapped by this ordinance that's all I have just a
[58:59] question. Thank you. Mr. Smith. Welcome. Good morning Mayor and supervisors for
[59:06] the record of Michael Smith, nine year residents, taxpayer and property owner
[59:09] in Carson City. Philippians 2 and 3 says it best. Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit.
[59:18] But in humility, count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to
[59:24] his own interests, but also to the interests of others. As you consider a resolution authorised
[59:30] an appropriation of a 30-year lease purchased agreement up to 30 million of probably escalated
[59:36] higher. On this city hall project, an interest rate estimated that 5% of higher by the non-profit
[59:43] hot and may add them's foundation. Before a project of this enormous magnitude with
[59:48] under a population of 60,000 people, the residents of Carson City should see a comprehensive
[59:55] independent comparison of the alternatives.
[1:00:00] It isn't about rationale that city employees are opposing every carcin city investment. When each of you
[1:00:07] were elected, you relied on your constituents to weigh their options and decide who be the best
[1:00:13] candidate for them before cashing their vote. And as a result of those ballots, they voted for each
[1:00:20] of you in office. Now, is your time to consider those same constituents and to hear their
[1:00:26] of reasoning and concerns if they were so astute to vote for you then,
[1:00:33] let's be astute in listening to the citizens.
[1:00:36] That's called representation, not the appearance of represented your constituency.
[1:00:42] This is about asking a very basic question.
[1:00:45] Showed his citizens exactly why this particular project is the best solution.
[1:00:51] For yet in a back room deals, let's bring it to the sunlight for citizens to see, show
[1:00:57] us a calls to analysis, what do you have to hide? Tax spares will be on the hook,
[1:01:03] but 30 years. We demand to see options, I.E. Repurpose existing buildings, renovate existing
[1:01:11] facilities, and they're calls associated with those options. Carson City resident should
[1:01:18] have a meaningful voice before such a long-term commitment is made.
[1:01:24] These are questions that should be answered before and not after Carson City commits
[1:01:29] to this financial undertaken.
[1:01:31] Mayer and supervisors, I employ you to do the right being by offering a referendum to bring
[1:01:39] this to the citizens for you vote.
[1:01:42] Remember, this is our city, our money, our voice.
[1:01:47] the most importantly, our vote. Thank you very much.
[1:01:53] Let's dress her.
[1:01:54] Pepsi's draws for Carson City resident.
[1:01:57] Well, I couldn't have said it any better than Michael Smith.
[1:02:00] So I'm not going to try.
[1:02:04] The citizens, the residents of this town,
[1:02:07] has asked for a comparative analysis.
[1:02:10] It is still pending. It's a standing request.
[1:02:12] And we've heard that the last time the B of A building was considered when Nancy Polson was the city manager in July 2021 as of last week.
[1:02:27] Another proposal came from the same building and we would like to see that standing against this proposal.
[1:02:35] At the March 19 meeting there was a lot of conversation about cost per square foot renovation versus the building new.
[1:02:46] What I found out is that the courthouse renovation is approximately $700 per square foot for level one and level two.
[1:02:58] first story, second story renovation as I look at the 30 million over 45,000 square feet that is approximately the same.
[1:03:10] So why not take advantage of all the empty buildings that we so hate to have in Carson City and use that instead of
[1:03:20] covering the residents for 30 years, sure what the real alternatives are in detail and in
[1:03:28] writing versus a tabletop discussion among city staff and then a tickmark chart that we don't
[1:03:36] know where the background is. Which came first? The HMFA, HMAF proposal and then everything else
[1:03:46] done to fit into that envelope as we found out and I said before we really need to know what
[1:03:55] that legally available funds are. As the mayor said, what where when et cetera. Yes, it gives
[1:04:03] you flexibility but given the history of this project, too much flexibility is not good for the
[1:04:12] it's obscure and it hides the facts that JNA reports says that they are
[1:04:18] other cheaper alternatives. The amortization that service schedules shows a 5%
[1:04:25] interest rate, yet the federal credit union term sheet said prime minus 1 and
[1:04:32] then prime was 6.75 as of last Friday. So the other thing is that they have to
[1:04:39] via justification for using this installment purchase agreement.
[1:04:45] The justifications are all subjective.
[1:04:49] Well, we got to honor the move date of March 2029 for the Plurcrop Order.
[1:04:55] the HMFF incurred upfront project cost of.
[1:05:00] So we don't have to pay any more. Well, we are. We are reimbursing them. Thank you, Ms. Trusper.
[1:05:07] Thank you. I submitted this in the right order. Thank you. If there's anyone else that's going to make public comment, you can come up to the chairs to me.
[1:05:17] Hi, I'm Martha Sanchez for the record. Just want to talk about what ifs and just ask more questions, because that's the fun stuff.
[1:05:25] Something that concerns me greatly is future appropriations, so future boards, future mayors.
[1:05:33] For those appropriations, we heard that those appropriations can be reconsidered.
[1:05:38] Nearly, and if not made, what is that plan?
[1:05:40] Just to have those plans documented.
[1:05:44] I think that's a very important.
[1:05:47] And also, just wanted to put on the table public private partnerships.
[1:05:52] The potential, you know, is there to do good things and we just, I can understand the least purchase agreement at the front end because you feel as if we're moving risk from the city for the construction.
[1:06:02] But once that turns over, you know, where we do make that purchase if that's the plan, you know, where when does risk move over completely to the constituent base that's where we can't just look at the up front.
[1:06:17] We also have to look at the long-term viability,
[1:06:21] the sustainability of the project.
[1:06:23] I would also consider openness, yeah, just risk.
[1:06:30] You know, who is carrying that
[1:06:32] and making sure that that plan is a very well-documented,
[1:06:35] I think that there needs to be much more public discourse.
[1:06:39] We need to see the financials,
[1:06:43] and we need to see how those assumptions are made.
[1:06:48] Garrett. Mayor Bagwell, supervisors, my name is Garrett LePier, and I'm here speaking on behalf
[1:06:54] of myself and not for any entity that I represent or I'm a part of. I'm a born and raised
[1:07:01] Carson City resident. I've spent 26 years in real estate and I hold the CCIM designation,
[1:07:07] which is the commercial analysis credential. So let me talk about this the way I talk to a client
[1:07:12] about deciding whether to remodel or rebuild.
[1:07:16] I hear the same objection everywhere I go.
[1:07:18] It costs too much.
[1:07:20] And I'd ask a simple question back.
[1:07:22] Compared to what?
[1:07:24] Because your own staff already ran in analysis,
[1:07:27] expanding the existing building on Carson Street,
[1:07:30] priced out at around 37 million.
[1:07:32] And staff flagged it as the most expensive option,
[1:07:34] per square foot.
[1:07:36] Because the first floor would need extensive retrofitting
[1:07:39] just to carry additional floors.
[1:07:41] The new build is authorized at 30 million, that's not a close call, that's seven million dollars more to end up with a former bank building wearing a new hat.
[1:07:52] I do this math for sellers every week. When a building's bones aren't designed for what you're asking them to do, retrofits cost just don't add up. They compound. You open a wall, you find something.
[1:08:04] You add load, you rebuild what's underneath it, and when you're finished, you spent new construction money on a used building and you still own every deferred maintenance problem that you started with.
[1:08:16] In my business, that's the most expensive way to save money.
[1:08:21] Second, the money is an interchangeable. The bulk of the early funding is redevelopment dollars, and those are restricted to redevelopment district by law.
[1:08:29] They can't be redirected to patrol cars or road-paving and property taxes aren't being raised for this.
[1:08:36] So just spend it on something else really isn't on the menu.
[1:08:41] Third, this isn't a one, this is a deadline.
[1:08:44] State law requires a third courthouse because our population grew.
[1:08:48] The courthouse remodel makes room for it.
[1:08:51] And that pushes the clerk recorder out.
[1:08:53] Those people have to go somewhere by 2029.
[1:08:56] do nothing has a price tag too. It just never shows up on a slide. And last I
[1:09:03] sell this town for a living. I show buyers a downtown that has come a very long way
[1:09:08] in 10 years. Putting city services behind one door downtown next to hundreds of
[1:09:14] millions in private investment is the kind of decision that shows up in property
[1:09:18] values decades from now. Please vote yes. Thank you for your time.
[1:09:24] Thank you. Do I have anyone else?
[1:09:32] Again, if there's anyone else just so I can judge, come on up and take the empty seats.
[1:09:39] It's Preston.
[1:09:41] Hi, I have a record, Terry Preston.
[1:09:43] And although I...
[1:09:47] Mr. Gopier and I are in the same business and I've been there probably twice as long.
[1:09:53] And one of the things that I do is I sit down with my clients and I say,
[1:09:56] What is the need? Let's get back to the need.
[1:10:00] The need is 11,700 and square feet. That's for a courthouse. It's not 30,000 square feet. It's not a parking garage. It's 11,700 square feet.
[1:10:13] That could be accommodated in our existing building. But what we're looking at is we're looking at a debt service that is incredible.
[1:10:20] When I look at working with my clients right now, I would never at this point in time suggest that somebody build a building.
[1:10:31] Not with interest rates as they are, not as the economy, not as far as war, not as taking something off of the downtown.
[1:10:39] I've heard rumors about this and rumors about that and they're going to buy this and they're going to buy that and there's going to be an offset.
[1:10:45] There is nothing been tangible put in front of us.
[1:10:49] When I look at this, I do not see the need except for 11,700 square feet.
[1:10:56] That could be accommodated in the night court.
[1:10:58] Anybody that's spent any time in our courts realize that a lot of the court is
[1:11:02] had done on video and it could be accommodated in the evening
[1:11:06] when it actually people are available.
[1:11:10] This to me seems to be a ridiculous situation.
[1:11:12] We have a situation where you're talking about adding $2.5 million to streamline the court
[1:11:18] systems.
[1:11:19] Is that going to eliminate people?
[1:11:21] Is that going to eliminate people that need space?
[1:11:23] Gosh, could you possibly pick some of that in our gallery?
[1:11:27] Could you pick some of it up in the plaza?
[1:11:29] This to me is a huge problem, as far as tying us up for 30 years with unknowns, with unknown
[1:11:42] interest. I'm one of these people I've lived during the time that they actually had to bring
[1:11:46] useria from 12 percent. That's why your credit cards went from 10 percent to 24 percent.
[1:11:52] There is no cap on the prime minus one. And these are things that would like to be recouped.
[1:12:01] So I would really like you to think about this. This is not a residential purchase.
[1:12:07] This is not one where we're doing equity.
[1:12:11] This is one where we can't have equity until we purchase it.
[1:12:15] So why don't we purchase it from the get go of it?
[1:12:17] It's truly a need.
[1:12:19] Thank you.
[1:12:20] Do I
[1:12:37] need to push the button?
[1:12:39] Thank you.
[1:12:40] My name is Dan Lacka, but I'm a resident since 2006.
[1:12:46] I'm a licensed real estate appraiser in the state of Nevada.
[1:12:49] The least purchase agreement indicates that the city will secure a 30 year 5% obligation
[1:12:57] bind to finance the acquisition of the new city hall building.
[1:13:02] Payments over the term are projected approach to $2 million a year with full ownership
[1:13:07] transferring to the city in 2057.
[1:13:12] Given my 50 years of experience in real estate and banking industry, several material deficiencies
[1:13:18] are evidence in the proposals of financing structure of this package.
[1:13:23] First, financing package contains no discussion of the financial impact associated with the parking garage.
[1:13:31] Notwithstanding the city's most recent financial report identifies a cost of the garage to be $8 million.
[1:13:38] The omission of any analysis regarding ownership, funding responsibility, or operational costs,
[1:13:45] prevents the complete understanding of the city's total financial exposure.
[1:13:52] Finally, the city's financial analysis relies on a best-case interest rate,
[1:13:58] assumption of 5%. The resolution authorizes an interest rate up to 3% above,
[1:14:06] what they say is the index of revenue bonds based on this scenario.
[1:14:12] This could increase the total project cost to approximately $80 million, substantially higher than the city's
[1:14:22] state-adestimate of $55 million. This $25 million discrepancy represents additional taxpayer liability
[1:14:33] that has not been disclosed or addressed in the current proposal.
[1:14:39] Since none of these items are included in your lease purchase agreement, that will be presented to the Carson City debt management commission or the State Department of Taxation, it will be virtually impossible for those board members to truly assess the overall debt impact of the project.
[1:15:00] It's worth noting, although the city will not hold feet title to the City Hall property until the final payment is made, it will acquire a lease hold ownership in the interests of the property.
[1:15:16] Undoubtedly, you are aware of NRS 244-275. This addresses a county authority to purchase or lease real property and expressively.
[1:15:28] requires that an appraisal be obtained to date no appraisal or preliminary value has been prepared for
[1:15:36] the overall city hall project. Why? Thank you. Do I have any other public comment?
[1:15:45] This is Meloney. Again, if there's anyone else please take a chair. Thank you.
[1:15:54] Morning. Good morning. My name is Lusha Meloney. I'm a Carson City resident.
[1:15:59] I want to be really clear that I supported the Town Square Project.
[1:16:03] I think that redeveloping the parking lot behind the nugget,
[1:16:07] which is one of the most dangerous dark and creepiest parts
[1:16:10] of our downtown is fantastic.
[1:16:12] I think it's a great idea.
[1:16:14] I was very supportive of the Town Square idea, right?
[1:16:18] A plaza where we can gather.
[1:16:20] I love going to the Brewer Center concerts.
[1:16:22] I love how the community gathers.
[1:16:24] I don't know how many here were there.
[1:16:26] At that concert, the last one of the season, it was, it made you cry, right?
[1:16:30] The community helped me together and the idea that we'd have another space like that
[1:16:33] is great. What's not great for me is this idea now that the plaza might go away.
[1:16:40] What's not great for me now is that, you know, just to be super clear for the public, we did a
[1:16:46] parking study of downtown and if you want to go online to the Regional Transportation Commission
[1:16:51] July 8th 2020 meeting, we presented the findings which are parking downtown is adequate.
[1:16:57] The findings also say parking downtown relies on the parking at Master Street at that other
[1:17:02] all these little side streets that are now going to be taken away to build the parking garage that we say we need
[1:17:09] for eight million dollars. A study has not been done to show why we need the parking garage and I think the
[1:17:15] public deserves that. I'll say also, you know, Lisa, you were elected because you are different
[1:17:25] and you are a kind and trustworthy human. Curtis, you're my bud, man, you're great. You're
[1:17:31] good, dude. Mo, people like you. You speak the truth and just like me, right? Stay
[1:17:38] you're a good person. People like you. But this is a bad decision. And at least one of you
[1:17:45] know that you've been advised more than half of the community doesn't want it. And you know,
[1:17:51] I think you all know that if you take it to the public, it's not going to pass. Good people can
[1:17:57] make bad decisions. And I know that in government, once a ball starts rolling downhill, it's hard
[1:18:02] to stop. But you don't have to make that decision today. Ask staff to put together a clear
[1:18:08] package of why it's needed, make it transparent the information that you all have received that are making you vote yes, make it clear and package for the public.
[1:18:17] I think everyone deserves that. You don't have to vote today like this.
[1:18:22] And I think we need a parking study.
[1:18:25] I think we need a traffic impact study of what happens to Stewart Street when the 400 vehicles that are parking in the garage are driving on Stewart.
[1:18:33] I think we deserve that.
[1:18:34] Please don't make a bad decision.
[1:18:36] you guys are good people. Thank you. Do I have any other?
[1:18:44] Okay then I'm going to close the
[1:18:45] public hearing and bring it back up here for any further discussion and I do have one
[1:18:53] for bond council because it's been brought up several times and that you lined out other options
[1:19:04] and other financing opportunities and you put dates that you could accomplish it if a bond
[1:19:11] could be sold, et cetera, et cetera, that I could do this in three months, or I could do that
[1:19:16] in six months. But my question really is to sell those bonds or those mechanisms, do we have to
[1:19:34] Peter's in with Jane, a consulting group for the record, Mayor, you're correct.
[1:19:38] The concept behind a revenue bond, a general obligation revenue bond, is that the city owns
[1:19:43] the building at the time that those bonds are issued.
[1:19:48] And so that's why I think that's a huge distinction between that and this proposal of the
[1:19:54] lease purchase, because this lease purchase does not require that ownership structure.
[1:19:58] All right.
[1:19:59] Thank you.
[1:19:59] I just...
[1:20:00] Like I said earlier, I think it's complex and I just want to stress to the public. It's not that I don't understand your questions or your concerns or I think this whole board does. It's just many things are a process and a step, right? And you do this and then you do that and then you do this and I get how difficult it is to put that all together.
[1:20:31] Um, but did you want to comment some more for the record Ryan Henry from Taflott?
[1:20:36] A mayor bag. Well, I was just going to add add to John's point.
[1:20:39] So, you know, it would be possible if the city was to issue its own bond to use those
[1:20:44] bond proceeds to acquire the land. However, it would, uh, own the land up front versus post construction
[1:20:53] with the least purchase agreement gives the, the city the flexibility to do. I think another
[1:20:57] important point to make on the record is just to confirm about the sequence of events here.
[1:21:04] We are still at the early authorization stages of this process.
[1:21:09] The city needs to get approval from the Carson City Department of Management Commission
[1:21:12] and then the Department of Taxation. And then we'll be coming back before this board,
[1:21:17] at least two times for two readings for an ordinance which will approve the actual
[1:21:21] these purchase agreement. And so over the past couple of meetings I've heard comments
[1:21:26] about lack of details, about various items, and those details will be included in the least
[1:21:33] purchase agreement that's eventually approved by this board.
[1:21:37] But at this early stage, we're in the authorization proceeding.
[1:21:40] So for that reason, there's a certain details where there's flexibility provided to the
[1:21:45] city, including the interest rate, comment that was made, state law determines a statutory
[1:21:52] maximum. The city has to provide an estimated interest rate to the Department of Taxation when it looks at this proposal.
[1:21:59] That estimated interest rate has been included at 5% which John can talk about.
[1:22:04] But when we come back to the board with the actual lease purchase agreement,
[1:22:08] our intent is to have an interest rate determined and that will be a fixed interest rate.
[1:22:13] And so it won't be any any type of floating rate or unknown at that point in time.
[1:22:18] It's just when we go through this authorization process, there's parameters we have to set such as the maximum principle amount estimated interest rate, you know, anticipated repayment source and then there's additional details that will be included with the actual least purchase agreement that this board approved.
[1:22:36] So I just I want to put that on the record because, you know, this is just just like any other type of obligation that's in its early stages of authorization.
[1:22:47] there are details that ultimately don't come until later.
[1:22:53] Thank you.
[1:22:54] Mayor, for supervisors, John Peterson, which I think is holding for the record.
[1:22:57] I just want to point out that the 5% is part of the proposal from the hop and may Adams Foundation.
[1:23:03] So the 5% is not a number that we plucked out of the air that is a proposal from them.
[1:23:08] That's why we're using 5% and to Ryan's point.
[1:23:11] I think there are a lot of things in this resolution that are covering elements of state law,
[1:23:18] whether it's the fact that the interest rate could be up to this, you know, revenue bond index,
[1:23:25] plus 3%, there was a comment or a question earlier about reimbursement.
[1:23:29] Again, this is stuff that we are, that we're putting into this resolution to make sure that
[1:23:34] ultimately when the city finances this, that there's flexibility that we don't come to some point
[1:23:40] in the future and go, oh wait, I really wish I would have done this.
[1:23:42] It doesn't commit the city to pay revenue bond index plus three percent.
[1:23:47] It doesn't commit the city to reimburse itself for any expenditures.
[1:23:50] It just gives us the options.
[1:23:52] So again, as Ryan pointed out, when we bring this, the final proposal to the board,
[1:23:59] all of this information will be laid out, all of the details will be there.
[1:24:03] And do want to ask just for a little bit of flexibility because this is not the final time
[1:24:09] that we're coming to this board.
[1:24:11] I think it's kind of interesting throughout the life cycle of this entire process that
[1:24:24] the public always wants to see the sausage being made, right?
[1:24:29] And so you're seeing the sausage being made and it feels on one side that it's drip, drip,
[1:24:36] You're right, and I'm getting another piece, and I'm getting another piece, and I'm getting another piece.
[1:24:41] But that's the reality, because until we get to the final lease agreement, it's self, which will do all the defining component pieces, it's hard.
[1:24:55] And that's why I said, I have empathy for every single point that you're all making.
[1:25:00] Making is, before we get to the final decision of this board, many of those things will happen, but we won't see it till the end.
[1:25:12] And the thought process is, here, this is an authorization that looks out to say, can I even go down the road?
[1:25:23] And it, to me, doesn't even matter if it is a city hall in this location, it would be no different than it was the Bank of America bill.
[1:25:33] It doesn't matter what building. It doesn't matter if it was one of Terry's buildings that she suggested.
[1:25:39] It doesn't matter if it's a remodel. If I were looking to determine whether I could pay for it, this is a piece of a step that would be there.
[1:25:49] Right, we could just change the name out. Like you said, we did Centennial Park. We've done lots of
[1:25:56] debt instruments throughout the life cycle of Carson City. And so what this is is the authorization
[1:26:03] to say we have the dollars available within the structure to be able to build a city hall.
[1:26:12] That's what this says. It doesn't mean we're pulled the trigger or that I have all the details
[1:26:17] to the actual lease purchase agreement.
[1:26:21] So when we get that, all those other components will be there.
[1:26:27] And I just want to make sure this is, right?
[1:26:29] Standard, it's the normal process.
[1:26:32] It's not different or unusual or just...
[1:26:38] John Peters.
[1:26:39] John Peters somewhat Jane A consulting group for the record.
[1:26:41] Mayor, I think that is accurate.
[1:26:43] I mean, there is a process.
[1:26:45] And as you mentioned, the city has financed other projects earlier, I'd referenced the John D. Winters Park Project.
[1:26:52] You know, we financed years ago, the emergency operations center.
[1:26:57] At some point, we were in a similar position on those projects as we are today,
[1:27:01] where, you know, we have some estimates of what this thing looks like.
[1:27:04] Here's the proposal. Here's, you know, here's basically the affordability for the city to do this.
[1:27:08] We'd like permission to then take the next steps and to follow the law,
[1:27:12] to ultimately get to the final presentation of here's what it actually is. And for this project, we anticipate that's going to be later this fall in October and November.
[1:27:21] Okay, thank you. So any other members have a question.
[1:27:25] Got comment.
[1:27:28] I'm not seeing raised hands.
[1:27:31] Supervisor White, did you come to come?
[1:27:33] Just a clarification on what we're doing today.
[1:27:38] We had public comment during
[1:27:43] This portion of the agenda item where we have further public comment when we're done with this portion of the agenda item.
[1:27:55] No, we close the public hearing.
[1:27:59] Public comment is closed for this item.
[1:28:03] Item 14A.
[1:28:05] Okay.
[1:28:05] Thank you.
[1:28:08] Okay, then is the board ready to make a motion?
[1:28:14] Here, again, any comments?
[1:28:18] Supervisor Shootie?
[1:28:24] I moved to adopt resolution number 2026-R-23.
[1:28:31] I have a motion in a second on discussion.
[1:28:34] Supervisor White.
[1:28:36] Thank you.
[1:28:41] As usual, I had a fairly well thought-out prepared statement to make on this agenda item, and at this point I really don't even know where to begin.
[1:28:55] We had a motion on July 16th that this board should receive and by implication in the public an explanation of the legality of the redevelopment authority money.
[1:29:10] First of all, we have not received that explanation.
[1:29:13] We had a verbal dissertation today that I can imagine how we would be expected to receive and digest that explanation in a manner that would allow us to make a good decision today.
[1:29:32] Secondly, the fact that we received that verbal explanation today leads me to believe that my concerns and questions on July 16 regarding the RDA expenditures, I will take today.
[1:30:00] Today's delivery of that verbal explanation of as an affirmation that I was right. We can't spend RDA money in the manner that was being suggested.
[1:30:10] Today we are suddenly told that we're not talking about RDA debt yet we might still spend RDA money on this proposed debt.
[1:30:27] You have thrown substantial more shadow on this financing than we had before, and I can tell you,
[1:30:37] I am even more opposed to this situation.
[1:30:42] We had better, less expensive options on the table by expanding the courthouse, and that's exactly what we should do.
[1:30:55] All those in favor, please say aye.
[1:30:58] Aye. Any opposed, say no?
[1:31:01] No.
[1:31:02] Let the record reflect it was four yeses and one no by supervisor.
[1:31:07] Thank you.
[1:31:09] We're now going to go to agenda item 15A, which is discussion and possible action to adopt on second reading.
[1:31:17] Bill No. 1-09, which is the ordinance repealing the provisions covering the Carson City Center project.
[1:31:28] Mr. Martell, have we had any additional information or changes from the first reading?
[1:31:35] No, may or may have not.
[1:31:36] Does any member have any questions on this?
[1:31:41] Okay, I will accept public comment on this item.
[1:31:52] Let's see.
[1:31:56] Pepsi, Straussburg.
[1:31:58] The audience says that no public funding can be used for the proposed Carson City Center.
[1:32:07] Commonly known as the Nugget Economic Development Project on the Nugget 2.0
[1:32:15] without a majority vote of the people
[1:32:17] approving such public funding.
[1:32:21] The board, 2012 Board of Supervisors
[1:32:24] elected to adopt this ordinance in 2012,
[1:32:29] even though they were advised by the DA,
[1:32:32] that the initial ordinance language
[1:32:34] as submitted was likely unlawful,
[1:32:37] because it sought to oversee the spending power
[1:32:40] of the board as granted by the state statutory
[1:32:44] provisions, but they still did it because they knew that it was a safeguard for the people
[1:32:51] and they honored the people's right to have a say on public funding. And we are seeing over
[1:32:59] on over again that this board is trying to do things without disclosing everything as well as
[1:33:10] during a justification, so today that safeguard is even more important because this board needs
[1:33:20] to hear the voice of the people. And that's the same voice that elected all of you. Do
[1:33:27] you believe in the voice of the people? As simple rewrite would accomplish taking the obsolete
[1:33:34] language out. No public funding shall be used for project in Carson City on private property
[1:33:41] without a majority vote of the people approving the funding. This is a simple change.
[1:33:48] And please, that would allow us to take this city hall and parking structure to a vote of the
[1:33:56] public, let Carson vote and have our say in how we use our tax dollars. Thank you so much.
[1:34:04] Thank you, Miss Senata.
[1:34:08] Mary Senata, I was unable to attend the meeting on the first reading, so I thought I would
[1:34:16] add my voice today before you approve this, which apparently you're going to do in spite of what
[1:34:25] any basis. The initiative clearly represented the citizens desire to have a voice on voting
[1:34:37] on these type of projects.
[1:34:41] If you really want to listen to the citizens of this city,
[1:34:46] then instead of repealing this ordinance, you should change the language as suggested by
[1:34:54] strawsberg, and keep it on the books, and let us look.
[1:35:00] Let us vote.
[1:35:05] Thank you.
[1:35:08] Do you have any other public comment?
[1:35:13] Nope, nope, nope, nope. Sorry, if you're handing anything
[1:35:19] out, there's rules for all that kind of stuff because I have to have public opportunity and stuff
[1:35:25] review so. Sorry. You want to look at it first. Yeah. Oh, I was going to say sorry, but we just can't do that.
[1:35:38] We have as you heard today how many different kinds of laws and rules and things we have. So it's got to be reviewed by Council for timing. Thank you. Miss Owens. Sandra Owens for the record. Um, so.
[1:35:57] The CCMC244010, no public funding shall be used for the proposed city, Carson City Center project,
[1:36:08] without the majority vote of the people approving with such public funding.
[1:36:13] Staff's reason was that the 2012 project is obsolete, different building, different financing, left of a code, no physical impact.
[1:36:22] Here's what the landlord filled in with the internal revenue service while that repeal was being prepared.
[1:36:26] A hop-in-may Adams Foundation, EIN-271393314 on their Form 990PF, and if you go to page 11, Part 5, or Part 7B,
[1:36:41] Adams City Center LLC was formed for the development of the Carson City Center to bring tourism
[1:36:47] in business to downtown Carson City. It holds a commercial property located at 310 North
[1:36:53] George Street, Carson City, the year's charitable investments include tenant and common area improvements
[1:36:59] as well as development costs for the future City Center project in downtown Carson City.
[1:37:07] Same three words, Carson City Center, same block behind the nugget, same foundation that it was
[1:37:13] in the 2012 deal, same season, you voted a term sheet and then deleted the vote rule.
[1:37:19] The only manager on the Nevada Secretary of State record for the Adam City Center LLC is Steve
[1:37:26] Neighbors.
[1:37:28] The foundation is a party that told the IRS to put money into the LLC for the City Center
[1:37:35] Project.
[1:37:36] You can tell this room that the 2012 Library Project is dead.
[1:37:40] That is true.
[1:37:41] You can not tell this room that the name is dead.
[1:37:43] The landlord is still using it on his federal tax return.
[1:37:47] Staff called this housekeeping housekeeping is taking a dead name out of the code.
[1:37:53] You're taking the vote out of the code in the same season landlord till the IRS, the city center project is still ahead.
[1:38:01] This is not housekeeping. This is asking the room to treat a name as obsolete when the federal return still uses it.
[1:38:07] vote no on the second reading leave cc mc 2440 one zero where it is but the project on the ballot as the city intended 14 years ago and just let Carson vote on this
[1:38:23] Do I have any other of the comment?
[1:38:28] Okay, bring it back up here for the discussion or emotion.
[1:38:33] I move to adopt on 2nd reading bill number 109, ordinance number 2026-12.
[1:38:42] I have a motion in a second for approval on discussion supervisor wait.
[1:38:47] Thank you.
[1:38:52] It's my opinion.
[1:38:53] And I believe it is based very solidly on what went on when CCMC 2.44.010 was put in place.
[1:39:10] I believe there is no nexus between that project and this project, regardless of the name of any entities that flowed around.
[1:39:19] I will say this, though.
[1:39:23] There is nothing stopping somebody from reviving that 2012 project, a previous board recognized
[1:39:34] the residence desire and took action to enshrine that desire.
[1:39:39] TCMC 2.44.010 was put in place for a very good reason and it should be left in place.
[1:39:51] On the motion, all those in favour, please say aye, aye, any opposed, say no, let the record reflect it was.
[1:40:00] Four yeses in one supervisor way. Thank you. We're now going to move on to agenda item 15B, discussion and
[1:40:09] possible action regarding a proposal from Adam CC Development LLC. Holy owned by the
[1:40:17] hop in the Adams Foundation to develop, construct maintain and operate a parking facility for vehicles
[1:40:23] down town and the proposed proposal. Mr. Martell, are you going to start us off on this one?
[1:40:32] Yes, Mayor, thank you. As has been discussed quite a bit this morning.
[1:40:40] Oh, I understood you put it on the back table for public. You know what? You can have mine.
[1:40:51] Absolutely, I will,
[1:41:09] it was place there. I'm sorry that there was an abunch and just so that the
[1:41:16] public understands, that's one of the reasons that everything has to be reviewed so that we can
[1:41:22] ensure that the public has gotten the material.
[1:41:28] Sorry, sorry that a snatch to before you,
[1:41:32] see that they got their first.
[1:41:40] Okay, well there was one in the there's one but sorry.
[1:41:54] Oh,
[1:42:00] I'm sorry I completely misunderstood what you were asking for.
[1:42:07] There we don't have that we don't even have that we're looking at it with you at the same time on the screen.
[1:42:14] it's not. They, they will post often times later anything that they did. They can post
[1:42:22] on an agenda, but we don't have this either. I'm terribly sorry, Beth. See, I misunderstood
[1:42:27] what you were asking for. I thought you wanted me out as handout. Okay. Go ahead, Mr. Martell.
[1:42:36] Thank you, Madam Mayor. As I started to say, as was discussed quite a bit here this morning,
[1:42:42] This is the next step in this program, as the board has directed twice to your team.
[1:42:48] We have continued to do our due diligence and look at both the site and the arrangements
[1:42:51] and the agreements that may be necessary to continue to move this project forward.
[1:42:56] In our discussions with the team, what we are recommending to you today is that the public
[1:43:01] private partnership is the best way to move this project forward.
[1:43:05] As a part of that public private partnership program under NRS, this is the first step
[1:43:10] that you can authorize should you choose to do so to direct your team to move forward based on this
[1:43:16] proposal from the hop and may have a foundation in their subsidiaries at on the property.
[1:43:21] So this is another step in that transparency, if you will, and moving in what I'd like to show
[1:43:25] up here again to today has been discussed again, a lot of the moving pieces that we have
[1:43:30] that would follow based on your last action, the debt management commission will hear the report
[1:43:37] next Thursday on September 10th. On September 30th, the item we are talking about today
[1:43:42] if you should choose to approve this proposal, this parking garage would actually be at your
[1:43:48] planning commission on September 30th, both for the parking garage itself as well as the required
[1:43:53] right away at the end of and it has been previously discussed with this board. As was discussed earlier
[1:43:58] today as well on October 15th, we are planning on bringing you today as of right now, your draft
[1:44:04] agreements for each of the parking garage and the city hall. It is our intent that this meets the request
[1:44:11] of this board and its motion from July 16th, excuse me, that we have an additional meeting
[1:44:17] an opportunity to discuss it in the public and with the board here. That meeting would then be
[1:44:23] followed under the current anticipated schedule. By the first reading, should you choose to move it
[1:44:28] by the first reading on November 5th and the second reading on November 19th.
[1:44:34] That October 15th meeting again is that extra meeting that was requested by this board in your July meeting.
[1:44:40] So we believe we're meeting this board's intent by providing that extra time for oversight feedback.
[1:44:46] And again, as was discussed a couple of items ago,
[1:44:49] making sure that all of those details are in place that protect the city both from an ownership perspective of the land and the building in the city hall.
[1:44:57] as we're discussing here today.
[1:45:00] As well as the property and underlying parking lots of, excuse me, parking spaces in the proposed parking garage that you're hearing.
[1:45:07] Also out there, you'll see that what we are working with with the partners as was a part of your due diligence request is we are proceeding with the CMAR process.
[1:45:17] This is, again, part of the program that we have to do that CMAR process is being overseen by Carol Aker's your contracted administrator.
[1:45:25] She has had contact with the developer and is continuing to move forward with that.
[1:45:31] But again, none of this stuff has set in stone today.
[1:45:33] Any of these timelines can change.
[1:45:35] And should this board choose at any time between now and any point in the future,
[1:45:40] decide that this program no longer makes sense.
[1:45:42] As was discussed again earlier,
[1:45:44] we will certainly stop and find a plan B for the city to continue to move forward in a positive direction.
[1:45:50] With that mayor, I'd like to turn it over to Robert Nellis for his presentation.
[1:45:53] Thank you.
[1:45:54] Thank you, Mr. Nellis.
[1:45:56] Good morning, Mayor, supervisors for the record.
[1:45:58] City Acid Services Manager, Robert Nellis.
[1:46:01] With me as Chris McKenzie, representing Adam CC development,
[1:46:05] LLC, a wholly owned entity of the Hop and May Adams Foundation.
[1:46:09] On July 16, the Board approved the lease purchase terms and directed staff to continue
[1:46:13] preparatory tasks to and pursue agreements required for the parking accommodations for the proposed new city hall.
[1:46:20] Staff in coordination with the District Attorney's Office and last the various legal options that would provide maximum flexibility for the city by achieving the goal of securing parking for city employees and the public.
[1:46:34] A public private partnership was determined to be the preferred course of action allowing the Board to consider a proposal for a parking facility, which would not require the city to become the owner or operator after construction.
[1:46:46] Rear consideration today is a proposal to develop, construct, maintain and operate a parking
[1:46:52] garage as a transportation facility, as defined by NRS338, if we prove staff will return
[1:46:59] to the board with an agreement for your consideration.
[1:47:03] City staff and the project proponents legal counsel are here to answer any questions the board may have regarding this parking proposal.
[1:47:11] Does any member have a question?
[1:47:14] I think I just have a general question if I can Mr. McKinsey.
[1:47:18] Thank you so much for coming today.
[1:47:20] I really appreciate it.
[1:47:22] We really haven't had on the record a little bit.
[1:47:28] And you don't have to answer anything
[1:47:29] if I'm stepping somewhere I don't belong.
[1:47:32] You can tell me so.
[1:47:33] Um, the Hop and May Adams Foundation is a 501C3?
[1:47:39] Yes, it's a...
[1:47:40] Can you tell me what its primary purposes, why, why was it established?
[1:47:46] What was its goals or, I think it's important for the public that they understand why the foundation exists if you can.
[1:47:55] In short, it's for the betterment of Carson City.
[1:47:57] It was formed by May Adams at the end of the four G-Past.
[1:48:04] You said, yeah.
[1:48:05] Well, I'd a little, well, what are those, sir?
[1:48:07] That better?
[1:48:08] All right, thank you.
[1:48:10] It was formed by May Adams before she passed,
[1:48:13] but it created the name of herner, deceased husband,
[1:48:16] a long time property owner of business owners here.
[1:48:19] And it was created at her behest for the foundation,
[1:48:24] it's so purpose to be for the betterment of Carson City.
[1:48:27] And it's been carrying out that for several decades now.
[1:48:32] And this is the latest proposal.
[1:48:34] I'm considered to be the,
[1:48:36] for the betterment of Carson City.
[1:48:39] And that's why we're here and that's our sole purpose.
[1:48:42] And I hope you see bit to proceed with down this path.
[1:48:47] I am a Carson City resident and here for longer than I like to say over 50 years.
[1:48:52] So I think this opportunity that's presented here for this parking facility is one of the first steps that would help this process move forward.
[1:49:06] I think one of the other questions really comes about constantly people are asking us for comparisons and studies and this and that and all these other things but.
[1:49:21] They'll be all that standard requirements when a permit when they go to obtain permits.
[1:49:29] All the somebody called it check boxes earlier, that's accurate.
[1:49:33] You'll have to do all the check boxes.
[1:49:35] There's nothing on any permits or anything that gets skipped just because you're hopping
[1:49:41] May Adams Foundation or the city.
[1:49:44] We have to complete every required element to get a building permit,
[1:49:50] just like any other business, but one of the things that I think is unique on this.
[1:50:00] Because just what you said. So is the hop and may Adams foundation contributing to the project?
[1:50:09] So more that you're not going to recover every single dollar that you guys put into making this project possible.
[1:50:19] I guess I'm looking, is there actual contributions being made by hop and may Adams foundation?
[1:50:26] And if you can't answer, you don't have to.
[1:50:28] I can affirm yes and even to get to this point in the process, significant funds have been spent architectural, all those things legal,
[1:50:37] accounts, accounting, all those things that this is not a done deal.
[1:50:41] And it's up for, you know, you did several steps in this process to get it done and you know, to affirm it.
[1:50:47] And so this is just one of the preliminary steps for the development of the garage and it's a statute that's created, you know,
[1:50:56] transportation facilities and this is where we start development and the foundation will be
[1:51:04] contributing more than half of the cost that go into that with the city, ultimately leaning up
[1:51:10] owning and this is still preliminary, but the city owning dedicated parking stalls under this proposal.
[1:51:16] Thank you so much. Supervisor Geome.
[1:51:21] Robert or Glenn Chris, whoever can answer, the agreement will delineate, I mean, the
[1:51:34] seat of all have a tangible asset when this is done, right? I mean, a number of spots will
[1:51:38] purchase a number of spots which we would own, right, in some form or another, whether it's
[1:51:44] a kind of medium sort of arrangement or something similar that there will be actual tangible
[1:51:49] asset ownership. Is that a fair statement?
[1:51:53] Supervisor, Jamie, for the record, Robert Nellis. Yes, that's correct. What you're allowing
[1:51:57] us to do today is essentially negotiate those terms. That's correct. We're looking to secure
[1:52:03] some sort of ownership that can't be taken away from the city without having the burden of maintenance
[1:52:09] for the garage and all that. But yes, it could be a condominium structure, some sort of
[1:52:14] deed restrictions. All of that's been, you know, thrown out there, but it hasn't been finalized. That's
[1:52:18] you'll see in the final I grant it. Okay. And we're only going to be paying for what we
[1:52:26] own, whatever that ownership looks like. Right? I mean, because I know you're in this negotiation,
[1:52:35] I realize everything I'm asking is going to be in the final document. I just want to make sure that
[1:52:39] I hear from you that it is actually in that final document. So we talked early on about about
[1:52:45] 200 spaces maybe we don't need 200 maybe we need 50. I mean I know it that's way more than that, but
[1:52:51] somewhere in that range, you know we made it with 200 quarter, but whatever it is, we'll buy
[1:52:57] number, we'll pay for the number we need, as opposed to having to pay.
[1:53:02] I mean the commitment isn't a flat 8 million, that 8 million is an estimate based on what we feel we need.
[1:53:08] That's correct, Supervisor Jan. We were looking at, as many as up to perhaps 180 spaces just
[1:53:14] to throw around number out there could be a lot less than that.
[1:53:18] We're doing the analysis now to deter
[1:53:19] and number of employees that would need to park there,
[1:53:23] people attending board meetings.
[1:53:24] So we're really trying to be careful about our negotiations
[1:53:26] and make sure that number is accurate.
[1:53:29] Yes, we will not pay for more spaces than what the city actually needs.
[1:53:33] And that agreement will detail the responsibility
[1:53:35] of maintenance of the building as a whole.
[1:53:39] I assume we'll have to be some kind of a maintenance agreement.
[1:53:41] If we own, let's say we own 180 spots,
[1:53:44] whatever that number is, we're going to be responsible
[1:53:46] for maintenance of our 180 spots.
[1:53:48] But the other however many spots are in that building,
[1:53:51] someone has to maintain so that there's
[1:53:53] an equality of maintenance, right?
[1:53:55] I mean, the agreement will, so that, you know,
[1:53:58] let's say the whole building is 400,
[1:54:00] just for the sake of argument, we own 200.
[1:54:02] The 200 isn't going to be maintained better
[1:54:04] than the other 200, right?
[1:54:05] There would have to be that agreement would have to be
[1:54:07] structured in such a way that there's a quality of maintenance,
[1:54:10] so that one side isn't responsible for doing maintenance
[1:54:15] in the other side just let's, there is a go, correct?
[1:54:17] I mean, it would be a shared responsibility,
[1:54:20] but defined, correct?
[1:54:21] Correct, for the record of our analysis,
[1:54:23] that's correct, Supervisor Jim,
[1:54:25] we'd be looking at a third party operator
[1:54:27] for the garage that would operate the whole thing.
[1:54:30] They would be responsible for the maintenance,
[1:54:32] they collect any fees, if necessary,
[1:54:35] not on, you know, sitting in place, of course,
[1:54:37] but those fees would then go into an account
[1:54:39] maintain the garage, which would be all the spaces, not just, you know, the paid spaces if you
[1:54:44] well or other spaces used by the businesses at the plaza, would be actually the entire garage.
[1:54:51] And will that maintenance agreement come to us when this P3 agreement comes or is that something
[1:54:57] we're going to have to wait to hear about?
[1:55:00] My understanding, again, for the record, Ravinalis, that would be brought at the same time that would be a piece of the overall agreement.
[1:55:08] The maintenance portion would be included in that.
[1:55:10] I'm always concerned with more attorney show.
[1:55:13] Adam Tully, deputy district attorney.
[1:55:15] No offense.
[1:55:17] I think just one thing to keep in mind is there's, there's broader responsibilities for maintenance.
[1:55:27] And that, for sure, will be coming to you at the same time as the development agreement for the parking garage.
[1:55:34] Some of the more nitty-gritty day-to-day stuff, that might be through some other kind of contract that comes later.
[1:55:43] So, responsibility will be defined.
[1:55:47] Operational, operationalization of that may come later.
[1:55:50] Is that a fair statement?
[1:55:51] I think that's fair.
[1:55:52] Yes.
[1:55:52] I think that makes sense.
[1:55:54] It's hard to know exactly what maintenance has to happen until, certainly broad maintenance,
[1:55:59] you have to, you know, painting the floor, whatever the floor is made of, maintenance of all
[1:56:04] of that, but emptying garbage cans and how many garbage, I mean, that part I get.
[1:56:08] Big stuff can be settled up front, and the smaller stuff might even be like contracts that
[1:56:14] are like five-year times, right now, right?
[1:56:17] Okay.
[1:56:17] That's kind of to be seen.
[1:56:19] And somewhere in there, I assume we're going to have to work out the free component because I think
[1:56:25] there's an understanding that there is going to be a paid-apart scenario, but that if you're
[1:56:30] coming for city business, there will be free parking because we own the city, the citizens own the spots.
[1:56:38] I want to make sure that there's a way to ensure that hours are related to activities that occur
[1:56:44] with the city. So if we have employees who work on a Saturday, for instance, they shouldn't
[1:56:50] have to pay to come in on a Saturday. If we have an evening meeting or the school board has
[1:56:55] a meeting, or any public body is having the meeting in the meeting room in the city hall,
[1:57:01] they shouldn't have to pay. So I want to make sure that's in there. I don't, it has to be
[1:57:05] at no cost, however we work that out for those public meetings or the use of city hall.
[1:57:12] Again, for the record, Robin Ellis, it's good to get all of these comments from the board
[1:57:18] on the record because this helps us craft the negotiations, but yes, we've been discussing
[1:57:22] those various things, some sort of voucher system without look like working with an operator
[1:57:28] who is used to dealing with that kind of thing.
[1:57:31] So yes, if someone came to City Hall, there's that the treasurer's office, they get a voucher,
[1:57:36] they park for free, they leave, they don't pay anything, you know, somebody, we have employees
[1:57:40] that would work on the weekend. Of course, you know, they would be able to park here. We've
[1:57:45] talked about, you know, some of the ways, you know, off site would need to have spaces to come.
[1:57:51] So I work at public works, off sites. I come and I park for free if I come to the city hall.
[1:57:56] But then I don't work here full time. So I, on the weekend, I wouldn't be parking there.
[1:58:01] Right. For wouldn't have a need to know. I mean, that makes sense. And I know that there's other
[1:58:05] municipalities that I've interacted with for that works for you. You have to do business in the
[1:58:11] government building or the state building and you, you know, you go in, you have your meeting,
[1:58:16] they give you a little QR code and you scan yourself out and it's no cost. So, okay, I think that
[1:58:22] covers the questions that I had. Thank you. Supervisor White, the floor. Thank you.
[1:58:33] I apologize for the interruption.
[1:58:39] NRS 21A420 requires me to make a disclosure.
[1:58:43] I have a conflict of interest and abstain if the conflict is disqualifying.
[1:58:51] I did not realize that Allison McKinsey law firm
[1:58:55] is representing the Hop and May Adams Foundation.
[1:58:59] I am a client of the Allison McKenzie law firm, but that attorney client relationship has no
[1:59:06] nexus to this matter, and I do not believe that I have a disqualifying interest. I make this
[1:59:13] disclosure for transparency, but I will be voting on this item.
[1:59:25] Is that a ditto? Yeah, I mean, Chris is not my attorney, but an attorney in their firm
[1:59:32] has done a state planning for me.
[1:59:35] Empress, 21A, 420, requires me who wrote this, requires me to disclose to make a disclosure
[1:59:42] if I have a conflict of interest and of stain, if the conflict is disqualifying.
[1:59:47] I did not realize that Allison McKinsey law firm was representing the Hop in May Adams Foundation.
[1:59:54] And I also am a client of the firm, but...
[2:00:01] What is that? Thank you. There is no nexus to this matter. And my relationship isn't with Chris McKinsey.
[2:00:12] I do not believe that they have a disqualifying interest. I make this disclosure for full transparency that I will be voting on this matter.
[2:00:19] Anybody else?
[2:00:21] Different lawyer.
[2:00:24] Thank you.
[2:00:25] That's all right.
[2:00:26] Okay.
[2:00:27] All right.
[2:00:28] Is there any other questions?
[2:00:31] All right.
[2:00:31] Then I will open this up for.
[2:00:33] Is there any public comment on this item?
[2:00:37] Mr. French.
[2:00:44] Thank you, Mary.
[2:00:45] Mayor.
[2:00:45] Denny French.
[2:00:46] Carson City.
[2:00:47] I was vice that there had been a glitch in the
[2:00:51] to reach the agenda on the computer and Stephanie Advice Stephanie Hicks, excuse me. Advice
[2:00:59] that that glitch has been corrected. I would just like to say that considering the court house
[2:01:06] considering the parking, considering city hall, considering the streets that we will be losing
[2:01:12] and considering all this, that you all take in this as if you put in the horse before the cart.
[2:01:17] We are not advised enough to be able to respond to what we're even hearing.
[2:01:26] This is to me, it's right word I think and I'm trying to find it, a travesty.
[2:01:32] I would bring up a will Roger statement is anytime you get, read something you can't understand,
[2:01:38] you probably are reading or hearing something that was set forward by an attorney.
[2:01:43] But, in this case, it's not just set by the attorneys being set by you all.
[2:01:48] You're vagueness the lack of direct and concrete numbers and statistics.
[2:01:56] Yeah, statistics is very hard.
[2:02:01] Very hard for me to sit and watch people I have watched and I have been observant
[2:02:06] and I am considerate of their involvement to why are we as people,
[2:02:13] able to really have a discussion. This to me is not a discussion. I'm telling you my frustrations.
[2:02:19] There's no interaction between you and I right now. You may or may not respond in private later.
[2:02:25] But this is not a discussion. We did more when we were looking at the master plan as far as public
[2:02:30] input and actual discussion. And most of you had been to some of those meetings.
[2:02:35] It's not what's going on here, so I'm very disappointed, and I don't want that to discourage me from being engaged, and I hope it doesn't discourage others from being engaged.
[2:02:47] Ask to have a vote put on this. Let your voice be heard whether you write it, you call it, where you come in. Thank you.
[2:02:57] My name is J.P. Mackie. I'm a Carson City resident and I want item 15B paused until the public receives a detailed needs of assessment and how the financial aspects affects the taxpayers.
[2:03:19] Thank you,
[2:03:22] Mr. Greedy.
[2:03:31] Good morning. I am Michael Greedy, a voter in Carson City since 1986.
[2:03:38] I disagree with the staff report that, quote, parking is constrained in downtown Carson City and quote,
[2:03:45] I have never been unable to park downtown even during the Nevada day parade.
[2:03:51] The proposed parking garage is not connected to downtown.
[2:03:57] One must know to travel east on telegraph from Carson Street to access the proposed parking garage.
[2:04:06] Visitors seeking parking will not know to go east on telegraph.
[2:04:13] Compare this with the paid public parking at South Slay Tahoe,
[2:04:18] where as, as soon as you exit the parking structure you are immersed into the adjacent commercial activity.
[2:04:30] The staff report sites say mythical town square proposal.
[2:04:34] The board should review the town square proposal in total if the parking garage is an element of a larger town square proposal.
[2:04:43] The Adam CC development LLC request claims a parking garage quote is an attractive civic gateway quote and quote.
[2:04:54] I do not understand how a three-story concrete garage attached from downtown is a.
[2:05:01] The city is a subtracting itself, subjecting itself to potential financial risk. If the only paid parking in
[2:05:10] carsten's city does not generate revenue for its operating costs. I just like reputation, but I will repeat myself. The more that I
[2:05:29] I urge each board member to read the previously submitted public comments.
[2:05:34] I must comment that documents presented in a public meeting not available to the public violates the NRS open meeting law.
[2:05:47] There must be a two week publication period of an actual agreement is brought to the board for an implementation.
[2:05:53] A customary one week, a agenda publication period is too short, a two week period will help
[2:06:02] support members review and a public's review.
[2:06:07] Mayor, I don't really know.
[2:06:09] Mary Bagwell's comments support this observation.
[2:06:15] I generally am not favorable at single issue judgments.
[2:06:18] This parking garage is a agreement as an element of the new city hall, who's financing was discussed in item 14A.
[2:06:27] But the new city hall decisions affects neighborhoods, street funding, potential other city services funding, and as a third year project.
[2:06:36] The board's decisions will affect the board's credibility.
[2:06:40] Board members, those will affect a board member.
[2:06:43] My future time for inspired.
[2:06:45] Thank you so much.
[2:06:47] Ms. Senata.
[2:06:50] Thank you, Mary Senata.
[2:06:52] Citizen of Carson City.
[2:06:55] Your motion requires you to find that this parking garage is a public benefit.
[2:07:05] It doesn't appear to me that it's being built for the benefit of the public.
[2:07:10] It appears to me that it's been built for the benefit of the hop and man and foundation.
[2:07:17] Mr. Neighbors in an interview with Carson now recently stated as much in fact.
[2:07:25] He stated that he needs that parking garage to develop his property.
[2:07:32] That seems to me to be a private benefit, not a public benefit.
[2:07:38] But city resources should be used to fund city the needs of the citizens of Carson City.
[2:07:51] They should not be used as economic development funds.
[2:07:56] That's why we have an economic development authority.
[2:08:01] The foundation is supposed to be there for the betterment of Carson City.
[2:08:07] Why doesn't it use its own resources to build this parking garage that they need to supposedly attract another hotel?
[2:08:19] I don't think the occupancy rates in the current hotels are full.
[2:08:29] to potentially, you know, we throw this idea out there that may be some time down the line,
[2:08:35] there'll be a city plaza, but in Mr. Neighbors' own words again, in the Carson now article,
[2:08:43] he states that, well, we don't know whether there will ever be a city plaza or not. So, we are proposing
[2:08:52] spending $8 million of city resources to fund a parking garage for the benefit of the development
[2:09:01] that the foundation wants to do. I don't see that as a public benefit, and I urge this board
[2:09:10] to vote against this resolution. Thank you. Ms. Dressberg.
[2:09:15] Pepsi, strawsberg. There is a consistency in the public comment, so I'm going to
[2:09:23] me repeat myself. The proposed structure is supposed to serve a public purpose. And my
[2:09:30] question was that public purposes, even on Nevada day, the parking in the city is adequate
[2:09:36] even with the roads closed. We have, we're going to have three new four-story parking lots
[2:09:44] within 0.5 miles owned by the state that is free to residents.
[2:09:49] There is no four-story 161-57-square-foot parking structure near the Brewery Arts Center.
[2:09:57] Every summer, 1,000 of people...
[2:10:00] Enjoy the consorts. Everyone finds a parking spot or walks to the concert. We pride ourselves to promote
[2:10:08] Carson City as a walkable city. The proposal calls for $8 million for $180 a parking stall. You
[2:10:17] used to be $200, but now $180, which is at a fully loaded cost of $44,000. Even the state does not
[2:10:26] guarantee parking spots for their staff.
[2:10:29] The parking structure will be paid by the citizens money,
[2:10:34] but we'll have to pay for parking in weekends and at nights
[2:10:38] when the staff goes home.
[2:10:41] Why not let Adams Carson City Development Corp LLC build a structure
[2:10:46] and everyone pays for parking.
[2:10:49] It'll be fair for everyone.
[2:10:51] The parking structure will be completed in May of 2028 at least one year before occupancy of the proposed new city hall.
[2:11:02] So board of supervisors, let me ask you again, is this a really a need or is it to help the foundation attract potential new investors and developers for future development?
[2:11:15] I believe that there are three alternatives, approve the project without knowing any details and how it's going to benefit the residents who are paying for this, get it done correctly as a fiduciary based on current real estate information as expected by the public or let Carson vote.
[2:11:39] That's the ultimate. We need to have a say how our public funds are spent.
[2:11:43] Thank you.
[2:11:46] Miss Stevens.
[2:11:49] Hi again.
[2:11:51] Karen Stevens for the record.
[2:11:55] If the taxpayers are responsible for the massive $8 million price tag, why aren't they
[2:12:02] compensated for their contribution by receiving free parking?
[2:12:09] It's our money paying for why are the taxpayers going to have to pay for parking?
[2:12:14] That doesn't make sense.
[2:12:15] We're getting parking away to the city employees, why should they pay for their own parking?
[2:12:25] It's not fair in any means.
[2:12:31] And how much is the parking fees going to be?
[2:12:33] Has that been disclosed?
[2:12:34] I haven't seen it anywhere.
[2:12:36] Another one of those secret things that we're not allowed to know, apparently.
[2:12:42] And why is the parking structure being rushed through their approval process to be finished a year prior to the proposed city hall?
[2:12:51] That doesn't make sense. Who benefits from that? Why has there been so much secrecy regarding these projects?
[2:13:00] The Board of Supervisors are entrusted to be financially responsible,
[2:13:06] avoid unnecessary risks, act in the best interest of the taxpayers,
[2:13:12] and ensure that taxpayers are protected before long-term commitments are made.
[2:13:18] There has been no demonstration that its firm already analysis has taken place
[2:13:23] or any analysis for that matter, except for maybe a checklist.
[2:13:29] As customary, the planning commission reviews projects before it comes to the board, why in this particular situation has the planning commission review been moved to behind the installment purchase agreement with HMAF.
[2:13:47] There has been no discussion or explanation provided for the reasoning of this odd change in procedure.
[2:13:56] Item 15A, B. Excuse me, 15B should be paused until the public receives true transparency
[2:14:03] of the long-term financial impact on Chris Carson City payers. And the planning permission is given
[2:14:10] the opportunity to fully review the project before it comes before the VOS again.
[2:14:17] If the Board of Supervisors ignores a request, provide clear and transparent answers to the public questions and to provide a third-party needs assessment, let the record show that accountability was formally requested and denied.
[2:14:38] And in addition, I agree with everything stated from the prior speakers.
[2:14:46] Do you have any other public comment?
[2:14:50] Ms. Olon?
[2:14:57] I'm Lucian Maloney, Carson City resident.
[2:14:59] As I-
[2:15:00] Committed on a previous item. The staff report indicates that downtown parking is constrained. However, there has not been a downtown parking study done since 2019.
[2:15:10] That parking study was presented to the Regional Transportation Commission at their July 8, 2020 meeting. And in that report, it states that there is adequate parking downtown.
[2:15:20] There has not been substantial land use changes since that study was done except for the major state buildings which have built parking to accommodate their demand.
[2:15:32] So there has not been a proven demand of this parking structure.
[2:15:36] I'm saying otherwise is unethical.
[2:15:39] I'll also state that while legal, this decision has found a mechanism to do public construction using private contracting authority,
[2:15:49] which office gates the city's responsibility to pay prevailing wage. Now you all are rationalizing it saying that
[2:15:57] you're getting $600 a square foot versus $900 plus per square foot that the state is paying for the state buildings.
[2:16:05] My understanding is this project is being built privately and so thus we would not pay that prevailing wage.
[2:16:12] We would then lease the building. That's what I was told by one of the supervisors. You don't need to interrupt me. Sorry, I do get three minutes.
[2:16:20] And so, you know, I'd like to get an answer to that, maybe we are paying prevailing
[2:16:24] wage, but I personally think our blue color workers deserve that prevailing wage.
[2:16:29] Our local construction people deserve it, and there's a reason that those laws are in place.
[2:16:33] I think that they would deserve it on the Town Square Project if there's public money going
[2:16:38] into it, we should be paying prevailing wage.
[2:16:41] And if we can't afford it, then maybe that's unethical and we shouldn't be doing it.
[2:16:45] Thank you.
[2:16:46] Thank you.
[2:16:55] For the record, Terry Preston, a couple of things is I used to do a lot of business in Asia.
[2:17:01] And one of my partners, when he hadn't spent $78,000 on a parking space in Hong Kong.
[2:17:07] And I said, why in that? How are you spending $78,000 on a parking space?
[2:17:12] He says, I have a $250,000 Mercedes and people in China want to drive even though they shouldn't.
[2:17:18] So this was a safety concern for him.
[2:17:20] I never occurred to me in my lifetime that anybody would say in Carson City we're going to pay
[2:17:26] $40,000 a for a parking space.
[2:17:32] While I was the manager of Leasing Services and we would lease buildings or even when we
[2:17:38] purchased buildings, parking is not a guarantee.
[2:17:42] They would negotiate parking spaces for specific city vehicles or state vehicles, but not for the individuals to park.
[2:17:53] We have street parking on spear, telegraph, plaza, ball, all that parking is on street parking that the city already owns.
[2:18:05] Now I'm seeing that you're considering on banding those streets for a plaza that may never happen.
[2:18:12] We're building a parking garage to subsidize and help assist economic development for a hotel
[2:18:19] which was promised in 2012 and still has not come through fruition.
[2:18:24] The hotels that we have right now that we've been approving are extended states.
[2:18:29] They're extended states for the construction that's being happening here.
[2:18:32] They're not heads and beds.
[2:18:34] They're not tourism.
[2:18:36] The parking, the plaza itself, has gotten smaller and smaller.
[2:18:41] Part of the reason that they wanted to abandon the streets is for the plaza.
[2:18:47] The plaza is in phase what three or four at this point.
[2:18:51] It's not even realistic.
[2:18:53] Things have been promised before, but to use our funds to go ahead and pay for a parking
[2:19:00] garage isn't saying to me.
[2:19:01] I should let you know is that I did manage the parking garage at Basin Street down on Virginia and Liberty.
[2:19:10] That parking garage actually was the court, the federal court, housed across the way,
[2:19:16] leased spaces on an annual basis for people that came in and that were jurists and so forth.
[2:19:22] The living stones church on Sundays, when it had at least space out of the parking garage.
[2:19:32] So they were able to do that for their parishioners.
[2:19:37] At no time did any of them buy space.
[2:19:41] So I think that is kind of crazy.
[2:19:43] Is that if somebody wants to put together a parking garage and feel that it's an economic
[2:19:48] Plus, to a community, then they should outlay their own funds and not rely on city funds.
[2:19:56] Thank you.
[2:19:57] Do I have any other public comment?
[2:20:09] Hello again.
[2:20:13] I want to stress, again, oh my name is Dan Lek. I want to stress again that you're deceiving the public. Everything here has been talking about a 30 million dollar city complex. It's not 30 million dollars. It's 38 million dollars.
[2:20:33] And I believe that the finance should be for the entire project so you're going to be
[2:20:39] generally honest with the people, not 30 million dollars, 38 million dollars.
[2:20:46] I also object to the city's assertion that construction of the new city of all facility
[2:20:53] will not result in a tax increase for the Carson City residents.
[2:20:59] staff has reported that the project will have no fiscal impact.
[2:21:06] This conclusion is fundamentally irresponsible.
[2:21:10] First, in order to finance a purchase, the city is driving funds that were previously
[2:21:15] allotted to funds for building updates, renovations, and other capital needs.
[2:21:21] They'll still need to be financed
[2:21:26] as commercial value, excuse me.
[2:21:30] Secondly, two major state office projects totaling some 230,000 square feet are currently
[2:21:38] under construction here in Carson City, combined with the 45,000 square feet of city offices
[2:21:48] as 265,000 square feet.
[2:21:52] Never since I'd been here in Carson City and it's grown in a two-year period of the ever-built
[2:21:58] office complexes of that magnitude, and they won't be on the tax roll.
[2:22:06] This level of new construction has already contributed to a decline in off of property values.
[2:22:13] The recent sales of two-large office buildings reflect prices of $43 a square foot
[2:22:19] capital plaza, and $89 a square foot for King's street buildings, which is significantly less
[2:22:29] than your price of $844, that's $38,000, not $30.
[2:22:38] As commercial values decline, the assessed valuation
[2:22:42] of the city's tax rules also expected to stabilize.
[2:22:46] Not have a gradual increase as we've had in the past.
[2:22:49] It at best will stabilize and most likely decline.
[2:22:55] To offset this loss, the burden will eventually be cast
[2:22:59] on residential homeowners, the most stable investment in Carson City, as well as property
[2:23:09] people at rent here, which is totally contrary to what the staff has stated.
[2:23:17] Thank you very much.
[2:23:19] Thank you.
[2:23:19] Thank you.
[2:23:23] I'll make it quick.
[2:23:24] May the sun just for the record.
[2:23:27] I just wanted to re-emphasize public-private partnership.
[2:23:30] We're looking at a private public partnership with this relationship need or, you know, non-documented need.
[2:23:37] I think we can negotiate a better deal for Carson City as all I'm going to say.
[2:23:42] I understand that the private entity wants to come in and they might have plans in the future for further development.
[2:23:47] That's great, but it should be on the private entity to make that investment in Carson City with the best negotiated price that we can get for Carson City for our constituent base.
[2:23:59] I think that is something that we need to consider
[2:24:01] when we're looking at public private partnerships again.
[2:24:03] Risk should fall on that private entity
[2:24:05] and not on our tax base.
[2:24:07] Thank you.
[2:24:09] Do you have any other?
[2:24:11] OK, then I'm going to bring it back up here.
[2:24:14] Just do we need anybody want to make
[2:24:17] comments or start with a motion?
[2:24:20] Up there?
[2:24:24] Supervisor Shuddy?
[2:24:25] I just have a couple of questions.
[2:24:27] So, there was a comment about the Planning Commission review and odd change of procedure.
[2:24:38] So, my question is, is this a change of procedure or is procedure being followed?
[2:24:46] We have intentionally stuck. Thank you, sir. We have intentionally stuck with preset timelines, preset processes.
[2:24:54] the parking garage and the City Hall complex, town Plaza,
[2:24:58] call it at what other people have a hotel.
[2:25:00] Today, could be anything but a hotel today in conversation, had gone to MPR prior as a larger project.
[2:25:07] The site did actually after you're approval to proceed with due diligence.
[2:25:12] The property owner did bring back both the city hall and the parking garage specifically to an additional MPR
[2:25:17] when we had additional detail based on your direction.
[2:25:20] And it is currently scheduled that I said earlier to go to the pending year.
[2:25:24] Well, now that you've approved that that management commission, the parking garage will go forward to the planning commission
[2:25:29] on its regular scheduled meeting of September 30th.
[2:25:35] I think there was, that we've approved.
[2:25:40] You approved sending your debt management commission,
[2:25:43] the ability to finance the program.
[2:25:46] So that, I misspoke my apologies.
[2:25:48] So that was City Hall.
[2:25:49] We're still pending that direction with this motion.
[2:25:51] My apologies.
[2:25:52] Let me clarify.
[2:25:54] As you've all said, a lot of moving pieces in this project.
[2:25:56] So your debt management is going forward
[2:25:59] as the City Hall program at the debt management.
[2:26:02] next Thursday, September 10th, pending approval of this item. This parking garage will go to the
[2:26:08] regularly scheduled planning commission on September 30th. Thank you. There was a parking
[2:26:14] comment or a comment about parking that there's ample parking with this stand true with the new
[2:26:23] city hall.
[2:26:27] A lot of the free parking that is this the ample parking that was discussed this parking
[2:26:31] that is currently on the property owned by hop and may add them to the east and south of the current nugget property so as you proceed with any development in this case potential city hall and a potential parking garage a lot of that space gets taken up with new development as the project if the project were to continue with the private developer as was discussed with the hotel concept that would require additional parking this parking garage anticipates that full development again pending your approval moving forward with the city hall that's the first
[2:27:01] piece when you look at City Hall being theoretically, depending on your approval, starting construction in March of 2027 has been discussed.
[2:27:11] The parking garage would be in there somewhere. The parking garage is quicker to construct and then the city hall, it's much simpler process.
[2:27:19] So theoretically, as has been discussed, it would probably be built prior to City Hall. I believe that is the proper thing to do to make sure that that parking is in place, again, pending City Hall approval.
[2:27:30] So ideally, we would have the hotel conference or any other future commercial development that the private developer may do on their own to follow that or align with it towards the end ideally.
[2:27:43] If that doesn't happen, the town square property does sit empty.
[2:27:49] But anticipating activity that town square project moves forward, it's a question of when that project develops.
[2:27:55] When you talk about how things need to be constructed and safety, the town square, as I said in a couple of meetings, it's kind of the cherry on top of the whipped cream right when this project, if this project moves forward and it develops with us as partners.
[2:28:10] That town square will be there if we do not move forward as partners.
[2:28:13] Hop in May Adams, I'm anticipating we'll move forward with some other project over the next few years as well.
[2:28:18] So that's what it anticipates, long answer short answer yes with the future development that we're talking about today.
[2:28:23] additional parking will be required to support those activities.
[2:28:26] Okay, and so the parking supports accessibility to city hall, to board meetings, to
[2:28:35] corporate quarter, is that accurate?
[2:28:38] Yes.
[2:28:39] Yes.
[2:28:39] Supervisor Diaz and his again Robert and the team discussed.
[2:28:43] That is part of the negotiations that have started.
[2:28:46] Again, if you approve this today, we'll continue.
[2:28:48] as a part of those relations with the attorneys and everything to make sure that not only the day-to-day operations are covered,
[2:28:56] but as supervisor Julia, I think, asked that standing board meetings, school board meetings, those kind of things.
[2:29:03] Residents will not have to pay, do you participate in their government?
[2:29:07] There was a gentleman discussed 30 million versus 38 million, so I'm just asking, and I know
[2:29:18] this is but been spoken to before, but why the separation of the parking garage funding
[2:29:25] from the City Hall funding?
[2:29:29] First and foremost, it is your team's intent to be as transparent as possible in this process,
[2:29:33] we try to separate those first and foremost. Secondly, when you look at the financing aspect,
[2:29:39] the least purchase agreement is for the city hall. We anticipate buying that.
[2:29:43] That occurs long-term debt, and as you heard earlier today, a long process through
[2:29:48] legal, local, and state processes. Currently planned, the garage are component, whether it
[2:29:55] of being 7 million or 8 million or some number in between or lower it won't be higher.
[2:30:00] Whether it's lower in there somewhere, that is projected to be paid out of cash. So we do not have a funding mechanism for that. We are not projecting interest, cost or anything.
[2:30:10] And a part of that cash is coming from the sale of the existing proposed, to come from the sale of the existing city hall as well as the brick building as we all, you know, call it with where community development and your building department is now.
[2:30:22] So, two distinct processes, two different ownership, two different sets of agreements, and at the end of the day, we're just trying to be very transparent that they are two projects, but separate funding and separate users.
[2:30:34] And then just one more, thank you.
[2:30:37] Somebody brought up a cost of leasing versus purchasing.
[2:30:43] Is there a benefit to purchasing, over leasing, a benefit to leasing over purchasing?
[2:30:49] I think it's been this board's direction for year supervisor that this board would prefer to own us at assets versus leasing them.
[2:30:57] That is a large component of the aggregation of your city services into this proposed city hall.
[2:31:03] As Robert has discussed in earlier board meetings, when he did his analysis, that is a big part of it.
[2:31:09] At the end of a 30 year program, you have a 30 year old building in city hall versus a remodeled 70 year 80 year old building and that is an asset for the city to have.
[2:31:18] I would apply that logic to the parking as well.
[2:31:21] We are pursuing ownership to protect the city,
[2:31:24] long-term, if that operating group that is going to look to do that.
[2:31:29] Changes, we will be protected to maintain access to the spots that we need.
[2:31:34] Right, thank you.
[2:31:37] Supervisor Jeremy.
[2:31:38] I just want to boil a couple of things down,
[2:31:42] because there's been questions about public purpose.
[2:31:45] So if the city hall is built or any building of that magnitude,
[2:31:50] whether it's built by us or McDonald's decides to build a three-story office building
[2:31:56] to move their world headquarters here, you need to have parking for that building.
[2:32:02] There's a required, our own code requires X number of parking spaces for that building.
[2:32:08] We don't have that space.
[2:32:11] It has to be accounted for in length and not be accounted for on the street.
[2:32:14] we would not allow anybody else to do that.
[2:32:17] Our code does not allow that to happen.
[2:32:20] So you know, sorry, so if we have a 45,000 square foot building,
[2:32:26] it requires X number, I code of parking spaces.
[2:32:30] The parking grudge satisfies that public purpose.
[2:32:33] Correct.
[2:32:34] I mean, that correct.
[2:32:36] And the $8 million or whatever number, the figure we paid a buy our spaces,
[2:32:43] is not the only cost in that building.
[2:32:45] It's the portion of the cost that we pay for this space
[2:32:48] as we need by code for that building, correct?
[2:32:53] There are the, it's going to cost more to build it.
[2:32:57] 8 million buys our space.
[2:32:59] Doesn't buy the whole garage.
[2:33:01] A maximum of 8 million will pay for this basis.
[2:33:04] We will require for city hall, yes sir.
[2:33:06] I think as Chris McKenzie, the foundations attorney mentioned earlier,
[2:33:10] Hop and May Adams will be a better than 50 50 partnership on their side for that. Again, there is there is a benefit to them commercially in the long term, but there is a benefit to us and again, you're you are spot on.
[2:33:23] When you look at the ownership of the parking garages that the parking spaces that are used now.
[2:33:29] As with third tree parking, that is a benefit that hop and May Adams currently gives the city.
[2:33:33] Nobody pays parking on those lots because Hoppin may have said that's a part of their civic requirement under their foundation
[2:33:40] They helped redo third street parking lot and and that is a great asset for the city to use
[2:33:45] They currently allow everybody to park except trying to keep RVs and other folks out of out of those spaces east of the nugget
[2:33:51] That that space those spaces are allowed to be used by the graces if you will if they hop in may add a foundation
[2:33:57] So, as they proceed in development, regardless of the city hall or not, those spaces will be taken away
[2:34:05] and they will be replaced, one form or another. So, this we feel coming to you as your team,
[2:34:11] this is the best use of that moving forward and it does support economic development because it provides
[2:34:15] parking downtown as that area develops. Thank you. For the record, if I could supervisor, sorry to interrupt,
[2:34:22] Just want to clarify as has been stated numerous times in public and in private meetings all of the construction for city hall and the parking garage are prevailing wage.
[2:34:38] There is no exemption under these partnerships for prevailing wage.
[2:34:45] Thank you. Supervisor Wake. Thank you. Staying on the parking theme and apologize if I miss this question and answer due to my preview.
[2:35:23] The
[2:35:27] way we are currently negotiating the agreement, yes, and that gets to the maintenance cost and the long-term
[2:35:32] use and how that does the way it is currently being negotiated is that again the city employees
[2:35:39] that you city hall would have access to that facility basically 24-7 and as Robert said
[2:35:45] in his presentation that with anybody else in the city as an employee that comes in and out it
[2:35:51] would be key to their badges my guess as how technology would work and again if a resident came in
[2:35:56] for board meeting or to see the treasure of the assessor they would get the QR code or whatever it
[2:36:01] be for the day and they would be able to exit with no fee. That's the way it is currently being negotiated.
[2:36:07] Thank you. On page 134 at item E it says that the city's regional transportation plan applies to
[2:36:19] this project. Where in the city's transportation plan is this project considered or mentioned?
[2:36:27] This project specifically is not.
[2:36:30] We did confer with RTC and what their general statement was that with Stewart Street adjacent
[2:36:38] and commercial other commercial developments in the area, Stewart Street being a main thoroughfare
[2:36:43] if you were will that pending a traffic study, right?
[2:36:47] That will be a standard practice, which should this part and garage move forward.
[2:36:51] There'll be a traffic study to determine any additional measures that may be required to accommodate
[2:36:56] that traffic. I know one thing that the developer had early on was conversations with our
[2:37:02] traffic department and one thing they mentioned was that there will be a decil lane required
[2:37:07] southbound on Stewart Street for access into the parking garage and that in the access lane
[2:37:12] out have already been accommodated on the site plan, pending those early discussions. So a few final
[2:37:17] traffic to be determined but it is in the larger plan with the details to follow. Thank you.
[2:37:23] On page 133, right there at the very beginning, it says that Adams, C.C. development, L.C.
[2:37:33] and Nevada limited liability company and wholly owned entity of hop in the Adams Foundation,
[2:37:38] hereby submits a proposal to develop, construct, maintain, and operate a parking garage.
[2:37:45] However, on page 134, down towards the bottom, it says that a soon-to-be-formed and that
[2:37:57] a non-profit corporation, carcensity, development, corporation, will be in charge of the
[2:38:02] operation of the transportation facility.
[2:38:05] So, I wonder, who are we dealing with and what do we expect they might be doing?
[2:38:15] How do we're supposedly approving a plan today by meeting certain findings?
[2:38:24] And yet, I don't think we know who we're dealing with.
[2:38:30] You may answer Mr. McKenzie.
[2:38:33] Thank you, Madam Mayor, members of the board.
[2:38:36] Very good question.
[2:38:37] I think that's the jittimate.
[2:38:40] The concept is for a nonprofit to be, I'm sorry.
[2:38:46] The concept is for a nonprofit to be the owner of the parking garage.
[2:38:53] And right now, the developer is a developing in his,
[2:38:56] is Adams CC development LLC as the developer.
[2:39:00] The owner, presently, is hopping me, but it's going to be dedicated to the plan is, ending everything,
[2:39:08] is to be dedicated to a nonprofit with an order overseeing that nonprofit.
[2:39:13] And so it's not for profit facility whatsoever.
[2:39:17] It's a common private ownership.
[2:39:19] And so ultimately, that entity will be formed, but there's not a purpose for me yet.
[2:39:24] If things proceed, that would be the plan.
[2:39:32] I have to tell you, I'm not able to make several of the findings that are listed in here.
[2:39:47] So, appreciate the explanation on the transportation plan, but on page 130, finding number two.
[2:39:58] Um...
[2:40:00] Without a determination from the RTC or Campo, whoever would be in charge of doing it, that this isn't appropriate request, I don't know how we make that finding.
[2:40:19] I don't know how we know as it states that it is compatible with a statewide or regional
[2:40:27] program.
[2:40:28] Again, without the RTC or the Campo, officially publicly making that statement, how do we
[2:40:35] make that finding?
[2:40:40] The plans for the person's finding number four, the plans or the person submitting the request
[2:40:49] will result in a timely development or construction of or improvement to the transportation
[2:40:55] facility,
[2:41:01] honestly, I don't see a plan here, I see a request that this item be taken up.
[2:41:08] I don't see a plan for construction improvement
[2:41:13] for transportation facility.
[2:41:19] Again, number five, I don't see a plan.
[2:41:25] Finding number six, the long-term quality
[2:41:28] of the transportation facility will meet a level
[2:41:30] of performance established by the public body,
[2:41:34] over a sufficient duration of time
[2:41:36] to provide value to the public. Again, I ask who is the applicant that is putting forward this plan.
[2:41:47] If we don't know that, how do we make this finding? Again, I appreciate your explanation,
[2:41:54] but if we don't know who it is, if we don't know what their bylaws are, their mission statement,
[2:41:58] How do we have confidence that this will go forward?
[2:42:06] I just can't get enough findings in my pocket to make me comfortable with this particular agenda.
[2:42:15] Do you have any further comments or questions?
[2:42:20] Supervisor Sharia, I just have so two number four, the plans of the person submitting the request will
[2:42:27] result in the timely development or construction. I see will as a future that first one thing
[2:42:35] has to happen prior to the other, am I mistaken on that or could there be some clarification?
[2:42:44] I would tend to urge your interpretation supervisor and again there are a lot of moving pieces
[2:42:49] and I appreciate supervisors, whites, comments and knowing who we're dealing with and what those agreements look like.
[2:42:55] Again, all I can offer there is that that is why we are here at this stage.
[2:42:59] If this board were to say no, all any planned developments, any agreements, any other things that might have been in place would have been a waste of everybody's time.
[2:43:08] If we say yes today, then we go forth and we make sure that everything that has been discussed today is in the final agreement.
[2:43:14] everything to protect the city, and it's investment in city all, everything to
[2:43:18] and protect the city, it's investment in the parking spaces, and the
[2:43:21] and the ultimate development of the town square. Again, step one, step two, step three.
[2:43:27] This is the next iteration based on your direction for a new diligence process to
[2:43:31] come back and look at the best agreement and your staff and the external staff that we have
[2:43:36] consulted with agree that the P3 is the best program. That recommendation is based on your staff
[2:43:43] and our external consultants, it is not based on anything the foundation is recommended and
[2:43:49] they're basing that proposal based on our recommendation to you.
[2:43:54] Thank you.
[2:43:55] And is it fair to say that this process and where we are now is the result of many, many board
[2:44:06] meetings,
[2:44:09] discussing space needs?
[2:44:11] I think, yes, I think, again, if we go back to previous board meetings in my tenure here
[2:44:16] in the last few months, I think it is fair to say that from a construction standpoint
[2:44:20] and looking to the future standpoint, discussions occurred as early as 2015, and just within
[2:44:27] the last five or six years when you look at the open the space needs, it was done in 2022
[2:44:32] and presented to the board when you go back there and you look a few years ago where this board
[2:44:38] looked at Arrowhead property. It looked at North Carson Street property. Those sites were determined
[2:44:44] to not meet this board's requirements for various reasons. Yes, I believe it has been a long-term
[2:44:49] project and it's just again, if I could quote the mayor in a conversation that her and I had
[2:44:56] earlier this week. Again, it's the process. This is...
[2:45:00] This is transparency, whether you believe so or not. And when you look at it, it's just trying to find where this project doesn't make sense.
[2:45:08] Where can this board stop and say if that's what it chooses to do and that is completely right.
[2:45:13] To say no, this does not make sense for us. Mr. City manager go forth and find plan B and make it work.
[2:45:19] today. We haven't found that as your team. And again, I am happy to find a plan B any time this board does decide there is a no at this point in this project.
[2:45:31] Thank you. Supervisor Jami.
[2:45:38] This is not really a question to statement. We're not committing to anything. We're committing to having you relative to the parking garage.
[2:45:46] bring back an agreement for our perusal and scrutiny.
[2:45:50] There's no commitment beyond spending time developing a proposal.
[2:45:55] That's right.
[2:45:56] The plan, as this agenda item says.
[2:45:59] That's correct supervisor.
[2:46:02] Supervisor wait.
[2:46:03] But we are being asked to make these six findings today to pass this forward.
[2:46:09] And when you have comments in the staff reports such as finding number five,
[2:46:14] The city will ensure penalties are incorporated in the agreement that the board is presented
[2:46:20] for consideration. Well, if those penalties aren't here today, how do we make the finding?
[2:46:27] That's my point. That's what we're being asked to do today is make these six findings.
[2:46:34] Okay, I don't see anyone else with their
[2:46:36] And as Ray, so do I have a motion on
[2:46:44] one to read?
[2:46:45] Supervisor Shuddy.
[2:46:47] I move to approve the proposal from Adam CCD Development LLC.
[2:46:52] Having considered the criteria described in subsection one of NRS 338.166 and making the determination that the parking facility will serve a public purpose.
[2:47:05] contingent on the future execution of a written agreement described in Subsection 5 of NRS338.166 and to direct the city manager to proceed with all necessary tasks for the preparation of the agreement and any other necessary supporting material to bring back to this board for acceptance and approval.
[2:47:30] have a motion in a second, just slightly on discussion. I think some things in the law are kind of strange and I understand what supervisor white is saying because it's like looking at a ball to say something's already happened but before it goes to the planning commission on the parking garage and gets its parking study and it's things you can't
[2:47:59] which comes first. And so I will say I questioned, oh my goodness, what order, like you said, on all of this, it just seems a little bit strange on the order of documents, but we pay a lot of lawyers, a lot of money to keep us straight to keep us in the right order of how things have to progress through the process.
[2:48:25] and so I'm comfortable that we're moving it in a direction and I think everything really hinges
[2:48:34] on the final actual agreements that we get with full detail at that time and I too wish some
[2:48:44] things. I love information, I love documents, I want to read it all and see it all too, but I can't
[2:48:53] it until it's ready to be seen and until details. It's kind of like I looked when we do a budget
[2:49:01] and we put in there the five years of what we think we're going to spend on capital, right?
[2:49:09] That's something we do all the time. We utilize something called an engineer's estimate.
[2:49:15] We don't have any line item details that tell us how much that the HVAC at the community center is going to cost.
[2:49:25] What we have is an engineer that says, oh, based on known knowledge, it's approximately blank per square foot or blank per air conditioner, but what we have is an engineer's estimate.
[2:49:40] And then we go to bid if we approve those projects.
[2:49:47] And I see this exactly the same way.
[2:49:51] It's a lot more complex and a lot more difficult,
[2:49:54] but at the end of the day for me to make the decision,
[2:49:57] that's what it comes down to is right now.
[2:50:00] Looking at engineers estimates, but before I can pull the final trigger, I will have actual
[2:50:07] bids. I will have, I'll have stuff to seek my teeth into type stuff. We'll have pricing. Right
[2:50:16] now I have engineers estimates. I guess I just wanted to state that for the record. It is in
[2:50:22] the normal process of how things happen. It's just somebody said earlier, it's correct. We don't
[2:50:29] build office buildings and big projects like this very often right every 30 years or 50 years.
[2:50:39] Somebody asked, is this going to last longer than 30 years? I sure hope so.
[2:50:44] I think I'm going, I don't know if you look at our current city halls, what 50 years old?
[2:50:50] We tend to stay in those buildings forever, but anyway, I just wanted to say, I'm looking
[2:50:58] if this personally is engineers estimates, at this point in time.
[2:51:03] Supervisor White hit another comment.
[2:51:06] Thank you, yes, on discussion of the motion.
[2:51:09] In the motion, having considered the criteria described in Subsection 1 and RS338.166.
[2:51:18] At the risk of being accused of playing lawyer again,
[2:51:22] might I ask you to revisit the slaughterhouse?
[2:51:26] If you all don't get pretty specific about what findings you are making, we're going to get sued again.
[2:51:42] Supervisor Shudi on discussion of the motion.
[2:51:49] I can make the finding.
[2:51:51] I went back and I'm comfortable with you.
[2:51:56] Thank you.
[2:51:57] We have a, oh, I think somebody said earlier, it gets bad when we have a lawyer step up.
[2:52:03] Do you want to make some comments from the district attorney's office just the only determination
[2:52:13] I mean one saying yeah the only determination is that it be for a public purpose and the
[2:52:18] listed things are considerations you don't need to you don't need to find in the affirmative
[2:52:24] for each of those five things those are just things that you're required to consider when
[2:52:31] reaching the ultimate determination of whether it serves a public service.
[2:52:35] Thank you. And I think that was a great distinction to me, verse. Thank you, anyway.
[2:52:43] Any further discussion on the motion? All those in favor, please say aye.
[2:52:49] aye. Any opposed? Say no. No. Let the record reflect. It was four. Yes,
[2:52:53] is one. No, by supervisor, white. Thank you so much. Are you guys okay if we just finish up
[2:52:59] our peace and then we'll break for the Board of Health.
[2:53:04] Does anybody have any items or neat things to discuss?
[2:53:11] Okay, that was good.
[2:53:13] We'll go to agenda item 17.
[2:53:16] Our final public comment for the Board of Supervisors.
[2:53:20] Not the Board of Health for the Board of Supervisors.
[2:53:23] for the supervisors. Final public comment for the Board of Supervisors.
[2:53:36] Listen, okay. Okay. Mary Sinata, Citizen of Carson City.
[2:53:42] As my final comment, I'd just like to say that I'm very disappointed that there are
[2:53:48] four supervisors here that don't seem to care about the public interest
[2:53:55] or the public. Good. You're not listening to us. You keep. We keep hearing that there's been
[2:54:03] all these other board meetings and a lot of us have shown up to all those other board meetings
[2:54:09] and every meeting, four to one, four to one. We have one supervisor who appears to listen to us.
[2:54:17] And I'm very disappointed.
[2:54:27] I am Michael Greedy and I am still a voter in Carson City.
[2:54:32] I'm going to give you an example of why we seem to have these discussions.
[2:54:38] In front of me is sheet AS-1, which was one of the displays at the staff sponsored preview event a couple weeks ago.
[2:54:52] An examination of it shows the parking garage access will be on East Telegraph Street, but East Telegraph Street.
[2:55:00] The administration is annotated to be abandoned. This same graphic shows the deacceleration lane on
[2:55:11] Stewart Street, which was mentioned today. Although I can't find it somewhere in all this stuff
[2:55:18] is a notation that East telegraph street was going to be one way eastbound from North Carson Street to Stewart Street.
[2:55:29] These details are what's causing a lot of the public uproar, Mr. Martel's proposed schedule.
[2:55:40] I don't think it's going to be sufficient enough to fully evaluate these proposals.
[2:55:48] And I disagree with the mayor.
[2:55:50] These are not complex.
[2:55:51] Most of the people I've met in private meetings are season professionals and of evaluated
[2:56:01] far more complex proposals and I must reiterate that I think this entire city, new city hall
[2:56:10] and a company garage proposal is a potential black hole in the fourth car city.
[2:56:17] Thank you.
[2:56:20] Mr. French.
[2:56:22] Danny French, Carson City.
[2:56:24] I do appreciate y'all being here.
[2:56:27] What frustrates the head of me is this some mud foot.
[2:56:31] I feel that trying to be in the open and understanding what you're doing.
[2:56:38] I'm looking at the angles you're providing.
[2:56:40] And if you had things that I could really set my head to and I'm not finding contrary by
[2:56:46] people that are really digging into it and looking at it from another perspective, I'd go,
[2:56:51] hey, the reason we're not understanding each other because nothing's firm. There's just too much
[2:56:57] vagueness. There's too much speculation. There are people that are stepping into this suggesting
[2:57:03] their foundation parts or CCs that I'm not able to keep up with. And I think the problem is that
[2:57:11] There is a lack of your ability to explain this in a way that is comprehensible.
[2:57:20] What keeps moving, even the way it's brought up by the city manager, what moves this
[2:57:26] project forward.
[2:57:27] No, this is an item that is set to set up a possible construction, but it's not to pass
[2:57:36] for that yet.
[2:57:38] We're not at that stage.
[2:57:39] the way he worded it again, you refer back to my statements earlier, choosing your words is
[2:57:45] important. What is suggesting is you've got this all figured out. The only thing is you have to
[2:57:50] roll over us very quietly or just make it so bleak that we won't be able to catch you on certain
[2:57:55] things. But I think we have enough individuals with you included to be able to look at this
[2:58:09] stand, and you have a different position. But our understanding is not based on just this and
[2:58:15] that, it based on your own words. You've done this whole of confusion. And I agree it's going to
[2:58:22] turn out to be a black hole. If we don't get that stuff cleared up, people are always going to say,
[2:58:27] well, why didn't you explain it or why didn't you nail it down? So please help us. You're worse.
[2:58:39] I don't
[2:58:39] concerns that are, I think, sufficiently important for you to address and you're not. You're not giving
[2:58:45] us what we need. Thank you.
[2:58:49] Mike, that's not just for the record. I'm hungry. I just wanted to
[2:58:56] make a comment. It's interesting to see the agenda items and the recommendations by staff
[2:59:04] and just to remind you that we're allowed as supervisors. I think to revise motions and make
[2:59:09] at its promotions, not simply just disagree with the motion provided to us, I found that last
[2:59:14] motion interesting because it does say that upon bringing back, it was for agreement,
[2:59:20] not for discussion. So just find that interesting as House of the Motion was awarded. I also
[2:59:26] want to make a comment because it's been bothering me and I need to put it out there, the comment
[2:59:32] about Joe public. You know, we don't want Joe public all up in our business. That really bothered me
[2:59:37] because Joe Public is well informed.
[2:59:39] They're well educated.
[2:59:40] People deserve a seat at the table.
[2:59:42] They deserve to have conversations with our supervisors
[2:59:45] with our elected officials.
[2:59:47] Someone made a comment about ethics earlier today.
[2:59:49] We have an ethical responsibility to the city
[2:59:52] to make sure that we're having discussions
[2:59:54] and not simply dismissing people
[2:59:56] because they're Joe Public and don't need
[2:59:57] to be all of our business.
[2:59:59] Thank you.
[3:00:02] Epc.
[3:00:06] Straussburg, Carson City resident.
[3:00:10] I just don't know where to start. I mean, we have had 41 vote decisions since March.
[3:00:20] It's clear to the Joe public that you have made up your mind.
[3:00:28] So why bother? Why waste your time?
[3:00:32] Why waste our time by doing resolution after resolution after resolution?
[3:00:39] With incomplete information because it's all going to be revealed at a subsequent date.
[3:00:46] just get it over with. Make a decision. We're tired of you discussing the resolution of the resolution when you don't have the information because that's the mayor said.
[3:01:02] You are getting the information at the same time we are and if we don't have the information then you don't have the information.
[3:01:12] So why bother with all these resolution? We're not lawyers. You have a personal lawyer over here and there are lines in there that we don't understand.
[3:01:24] For example, on 14A, the payment of costs related to the project and the reimbursement of such costs from the proceeds of the agreement is consistent with the city's budgetary and financial circumstance as of the date of this resolution.
[3:01:42] as of the date of this resolution. What does that mean? I don't know. So just get it over with.
[3:01:49] Make a decision and quit wasting your time and my time on resolution because we don't
[3:01:56] understand that your role is made, but we don't. So make a decision and get on with it.
[3:02:05] Terry Preston for the record. Laurie, I really appreciate you bringing up something.
[3:02:11] is that you'd like to know where all the numbers are and the budgets are and so forth and there was
[3:02:15] something was brought up with the July 16th meeting. It was questioned is that and I realized
[3:02:21] this is kind of off topic but when we're talking about numbers which I know you enjoy. What we've
[3:02:27] got is we've got $30 million for the city hall and we've got $8 million here and the one thing
[3:02:32] that's brought up in kind of that was not really discussed because it wasn't in there and you had said
[3:02:37] in the 16th meeting was, we haven't addressed that yet.
[3:02:41] That's FFNE.
[3:02:43] That's the fixtures for machines and the expenses
[3:02:45] to run this thing, whether it be the parking garage
[3:02:48] or whether it be this building.
[3:02:51] Because one of the big considerations you have is great.
[3:02:54] You have a building, you have carpet, you have walls.
[3:02:57] You're still going to have to have a IT.
[3:02:59] You're going to have to have a desk.
[3:03:01] You're going to have to have a chair.
[3:03:03] When this was remodeled during COVID, that was quite an expense,
[3:03:07] but was picked up with COVID funds.
[3:03:09] Before a long time, this meeting room was absolutely sufficient
[3:03:12] when we were all there, but now we have six foot distancing.
[3:03:15] So you're gonna be doing a building,
[3:03:19] an estimated new meeting room
[3:03:23] of approximately 7,000 square feet,
[3:03:26] a 10,000 square foot open space,
[3:03:28] which I don't know if you realize is two basketball courts,
[3:03:31] two regulation basketball courts.
[3:03:33] What are you gonna do?
[3:03:34] I mean, you're gonna have to pay chairs for that.
[3:03:36] you're going to have to put in speakers,
[3:03:38] you're going to have to put in all of these different things.
[3:03:41] That's not factored into this 30 million dollars.
[3:03:45] Your desk, your desk, your assistant's desk.
[3:03:47] The treasure is office, the partitions,
[3:03:50] the counter in order to create the public interface.
[3:03:55] None of that is being factored into this.
[3:03:57] Are you going to do, like we used to do with welfare,
[3:03:59] that was a general fund account,
[3:04:01] and they'd have to take all their desks
[3:04:03] and we'd have to cobble it together
[3:04:04] with a planning person to say, we have a desk that was a VA desk from 1938 and weighs 400
[3:04:11] pounds.
[3:04:12] So now we have to put it here on a space on a building and we have to put it right where
[3:04:17] the floor joy is.
[3:04:18] So it doesn't fall through the floor, like kid and kid, let's talk about some of these things.
[3:04:23] And that's one of the things I want to talk about.
[3:04:25] That's money we're not talking about.
[3:04:27] Where's that money coming from?
[3:04:35] Karen Stevens for the record.
[3:04:37] Let's say I am extremely disappointed in Mr. Martel's comments.
[3:04:45] He basically told all of you, if you do not vote on this item in the affirmative, you
[3:04:52] have wasted all of our time that we have done with all our studies.
[3:05:00] I don't think that is good policy to do. It is to say to people, you need to vote for this.
[3:05:06] Because if you don't, this is what happens. That is not correct behavior for a city manager.
[3:05:19] Carson City resident. So I've been listening to all this today and I read the
[3:05:25] Carson now article. As it is I would be against this project but I have
[3:05:31] something else that I'd like to bring to you and that is I've heard several
[3:05:36] people say why don't you let the voters decide and I've heard no discussion
[3:05:42] whatsoever about that you all have to sell yourself for your positions and get
[3:05:48] people to vote for you. So if this is such a great idea, sell your project to the people,
[3:05:55] and let them vote on it. And I'd like to hear you all discuss why you don't want that to happen,
[3:06:01] because I haven't heard any discussion on that. Thank you. Have any other? Okay. Then we'll bring it back
[3:06:10] up here, and we are, unless anyone has anything, we are ready to adjourn as the Board of Supervisors.
[3:06:18] and just a five minute break is Dr. Lyons here. So we're adjourned as the Board of Supervisors.
[3:06:26] Thank you.
[3:07:03] I'm Dr. Lyons and leading by example. I'm wearing a mask today as my 14 year old grandson's mother
[3:07:16] who works for the elementary schools in Washington County has brought home some infectious material and I'm one of the last six grandparents to be infected with it.
[3:07:29] I don't want to share it. So I will I will I will tell you that it is not COVID, but and it is not influences. I do not have a fever.
[3:07:41] Noir has anyone else out of here, but it's not pleasant, so we don't want to share.
[3:07:46] With that, I'll ask for a roll call.
[3:07:49] Per person, Lyons.
[3:07:51] Here.
[3:07:51] Here.
[3:07:52] Here.
[3:07:53] White.
[3:07:55] Here.
[3:07:55] Member.
[3:07:55] Here.
[3:07:57] Member.
[3:07:58] For a long.
[3:07:59] Here next to you.
[3:08:00] You have a car.
[3:08:02] Thank you.
[3:08:03] Member.
[3:08:03] Never back now.
[3:08:08] And as an opening, is there any public comment?
[3:08:11] Danny
[3:08:25] French Carson City, Nevada, thank you chair, we go way back, you know me and and I think the board does a little or at least has a sense of my character or the fact that I am one.
[3:08:40] The deal is that this is a very serious time for us as far as what's going around it. I'm looking forward to Dr. Lyon's help with our understanding of the degrees of this.
[3:08:51] I also want to say that due to my library use and my park use and and getting around town,
[3:09:00] I've met a lot of people that are dealing with food insecurities right now.
[3:09:04] Our food banks are very low in their supplies and their supplies are set more for those that have cooking
[3:09:10] and facility of kitchen and such.
[3:09:12] We also have, I think, a sort of, of high, you know, areas.
[3:09:17] Fish is providing one shower for the men, one shower for the woman, women.
[3:09:23] And they have two washing machines and two dryers.
[3:09:27] They are stretched.
[3:09:28] And those individuals that do use those for the use of the washing machine.
[3:09:33] It's a dollar.
[3:09:34] And for somebody that doesn't have more than two cents, they're pocket.
[3:09:37] That's a big go.
[3:09:38] And a big get.
[3:09:39] So, I would like to see our city consider the situation we're dealing with.
[3:09:45] People are people.
[3:09:46] They're going to have issues whether they've lived here for 10 years or they've come into town
[3:09:50] on expecting Lee poversed.
[3:09:55] Those kind of considerations hit our health services big time.
[3:10:00] I've taken several people to the emergency. I've had, you know, we're, we're using facilities and we're using doctors and people's time when we could avoid some of this by having situations a little bit more compatible with their needs. Thank you.
[3:10:22] Thank you, Danny, for that. Any other public comment?
[3:10:27] Okay, seeing none, we'll move on to possible action regarding the approval of the minutes from June 4th of this year.
[3:10:37] I'm of the approval of Cercid Board of Health, meeting minutes from June 4th, 2026 as president.
[3:10:42] Back in.
[3:10:44] And that was a second from Supervisor White.
[3:10:48] Yes.
[3:10:48] All those in favor say aye.
[3:10:51] Aye.
[3:10:51] opposed motion passes unanimously on to item 23 health and human services. And I believe this is
[3:11:04] you. Yeah, sorry, this has got cut off. So this is my report. I'm just, no,
[3:11:14] it's partnership
[3:11:15] of Douglas County and that would be why we have this. I'm the Executive Director of Partnership
[3:11:19] of Douglas County and I'm here to talk about our
[3:11:22] since city.
[3:11:23] If you are not aware as of June 30th partnership
[3:11:25] Carson City closed their doors and ceased operations
[3:11:28] in Carson City and my organization was designated by the state
[3:11:31] to step in and begin serving Carson City
[3:11:34] so there was no gaps in services.
[3:11:38] I don't click.
[3:11:42] So just a little bit of background
[3:11:43] of who we are, partnership Douglas County was founded in 1992
[3:11:46] before Melissa's a nonprofit in 1993.
[3:11:48] Our purpose back then was to deal with the meth epidemic
[3:11:51] in Douglas County, that point in time 18% of high school students had ever used
[3:11:56] method in fedamine, and as of today, it's down to 0.8%.
[3:12:00] We were the third founded substance use prevention coalition in the state in Nevada, and
[3:12:05] partnership Carson City at that time was the first founded organization.
[3:12:09] Just an image of some of my staff that we have and we're really proud to be a driving force
[3:12:13] of substance use prevention, community resource education within our community, and to expand
[3:12:19] in a Carson City. So I wanted to start off first and explain what a coalition is because we're not
[3:12:25] just another nonprofit. Under NRS we have a very specific distinction as to what we are supposed
[3:12:30] to provide with in the community that we exist. And the first thing as a certified organization
[3:12:35] is to advise the Department of Health and Human Services on the needs of adults and children
[3:12:40] within the community. And it's more than just substance use. We look at the whole spectrum of
[3:12:45] behavioral health. Everything from providing information regarding homelessness, food and security,
[3:12:51] housing needs, behavioral health services, treatment and substance use prevention, misuse disorders.
[3:12:58] We also provide updates to them on any projects plans or problems that we're seeing within the community.
[3:13:04] We identify gaps in service.
[3:13:06] So if an organization was to close their door, say fish was no longer within Carson City,
[3:13:11] We would provide that information to the state and work with our local entities as well as the state to fill that gap within the community.
[3:13:20] Hence why my organization is stepping into Carson City as the Carson City Group has closed their doors.
[3:13:26] We also give recommendations for prioritizing allocation of resources.
[3:13:31] Whether that is for the state to come in and provide additional services, fund other programs here,
[3:13:36] or any funding that we received directly, we couldn't work on prioritizing it to the needs of the community.
[3:13:45] We convened interested persons together, so we host monthly meetings called Can, it's the Carson Agency Network.
[3:13:52] The Sheriff's Office is very graceful and allowing us to host our meetings there. They are open to the public, anyone is welcome to attend.
[3:13:58] And we bring interested individuals together to talk about the needs of the community and how we can address what is going on within our community.
[3:14:05] We also coordinate and share information, so one of the things my organization will be bringing to
[3:14:10] Carson City is a weekly newsletter that shares about events, activities, and resources that
[3:14:15] are happening within Carson City, specific to mental health, substance use, and behavioral
[3:14:20] health services.
[3:14:22] And then as we receive data, we will compile it into an annual three year report called a
[3:14:27] comprehensive community prevention plan, which provides recommendations for programs or services
[3:14:33] that should be funded within the community,
[3:14:35] while also denoting the organizations
[3:14:36] that are already doing amazing work within the community.
[3:14:40] And that is also free for anyone to use.
[3:14:42] So it's not just for our organization to own,
[3:14:44] any within the use that report to go right
[3:14:46] for additional grants or services.
[3:14:48] side.
[3:15:01] We implement and we provide services within the community. So that's where we do some of our direct work by going into schools and doing evidence-based programs, programs within the community or by contracting with nonprofits within the area to provide specific programs.
[3:15:17] And I do have information on that. I will not be passing that out, but I'm happy to provide it for a meeting minutes if you guys would like to have that as well.
[3:15:26] We also try to increase awareness of services that do exist within the community and reduce
[3:15:31] duplication of efforts.
[3:15:33] And what we mean by duplication of efforts is we're not here to say no more than one organization
[3:15:37] can exist, but if we find out that there's two groups, both going into fourth grade classes
[3:15:43] at the exact same school, doing the exact same program.
[3:15:46] We want to work with them to make sure that we're not just reaching the same set of kids
[3:15:49] with an identical program.
[3:15:51] Maybe see if one organization can go to a different school, we can look at different grades,
[3:15:55] So we can better use the funding in the programs that we have within the community instead of putting it all in one specific area.
[3:16:03] And then the last thing we're required to do is submit an annual report to our Regional Behavioral Policy Board.
[3:16:09] Share a for-along sits on that board for Carson City.
[3:16:11] I currently sit on it for Douglas County and we provide information as to the efforts that are going on within the community.
[3:16:21] So that was very NRS-specific as to what our organization does, but specifically in easier
[3:16:27] terms what we do is we're here to serve the community to have a happy and healthy community
[3:16:31] and support our residents the best we can. And we do that primarily through in-school programs
[3:16:37] where we're doing anything from substance use prevention education to alternative activities.
[3:16:43] I just met with the Mike Freeman at this morning and we're going to be doing a free swim day
[3:16:48] organization will cover the cost for everyone to go in that day because that's a form of prevention
[3:16:52] when kids and parents can be together in healthy settings. So I kind of laid out a framework for
[3:16:59] the next three years as to what we're hoping to build here in Carson City. First is rebuilding those
[3:17:04] canned meetings which have already started recruiting partners from the 12 DFC sectors. DFC is the
[3:17:09] federal guidelines on how we operate. It's a small image but we have 12 different sectors we're
[3:17:14] trying to reach. There might be more individuals within the community. We don't bar our services
[3:17:19] or our programs from anyone. These are just what they designate that we must serve.
[3:17:24] I'm going to start collecting information that identify priorities and gaps in Carson City
[3:17:29] and what I can tell you so far already beginning to work in Carson City since July 1st
[3:17:34] is there is a great need for substance use prevention education. There is no organization currently
[3:17:38] doing drug prevention in the schools. And so we're very excited to say that we hold the MUU
[3:17:43] now with the school district to begin programming in October.
[3:17:47] And right now my biggest challenge is really coming up with the DBA for my organization because
[3:17:51] it sounds a little weird when we say partnership Douglass County is serving Carson City.
[3:17:55] So really trying to come up with a DBA that feels representative of this area so that when
[3:18:00] we have a brand new coalition ready to separate from us, they will operate under that name.
[3:18:05] It'll be a familiar name and a logo that people know.
[3:18:10] Your two is just really growing capacity. At that point we're hopeful to have more than one staff for Carson City.
[3:18:16] Expand our programs that we're going to be doing in the schools at the moment our plan is to go into middle and high school.
[3:18:22] We are seeing prevention needed as early as second grade in some of our communities.
[3:18:26] In Carson City, recent substance use stats for our schools are showing that you as are having an increase in youth experimenting with substances as young as sixth grade.
[3:18:35] One of the substances that actually increased from 20, 20, 30 was ecstasy in middle school.
[3:18:40] So we really want to make sure that we're in the schools providing that education and supports for parents and teachers.
[3:18:45] Increase awareness and continue to develop a healthy organization with a sustainability plan and policy procedures.
[3:18:54] In year four, our year three I apologize is to have an independent board of directors, have an executive director hired at that point,
[3:19:01] and become BC and certified. So that is the state certification to act as a substance use coalition within the community.
[3:19:08] I currently hold that for Carson. When we go into year three, I will be working with that new non-profit
[3:19:13] to make sure that they can be certified by the state to operate in Carson City.
[3:19:18] And then my role as the Director Partnership Douglas County will to be an advisor on the board for this new coalition.
[3:19:24] So I don't step out of them. I don't stop providing support, but they can operate independently
[3:19:28] and I won't have any voting power per se on that board.
[3:19:34] So some programs that we're bringing to Carson City at the moment are we're currently continuing
[3:19:38] as the prescription drug take back day.
[3:19:41] The next one will be October 24th and I've been working with the Sheriff's Office for
[3:19:44] and the locations for that event.
[3:19:47] We will do the in a lock zone trainings or Narcan, which is the opioid overdose
[3:19:51] reversal medication and we also will provide that for free.
[3:19:55] I know Carson City Health and Human Services currently provides it so we will be a third
[3:19:59] location.
[3:20:00] And to provide that as well. Continue to do advocacy for behavioral health needs within Carson City. Make sure that you guys are representative and heard by the state in our regional partners, do substance use education and community outreach programs.
[3:20:16] One of the things that we also are tasked with doing and that we're happy to support is funding specific programs through our partner agencies to continue the good work.
[3:20:25] So as of October 2026, it's as current or October, but we'll begin in October, we're
[3:20:31] funding Nevada Public Health Foundation for a full-time staff to do the drug prevention
[3:20:35] classes in the schools. They have an amazing track record with public health education,
[3:20:39] and so they'll be hiring an individual that can go into the schools to deliver these programs.
[3:20:44] We'll be contracting with Ron Wood Family Resource Center for them to do positive action
[3:20:48] with both adults and youth, and that is a substance use prevention program.
[3:20:52] And we're also going to be working with the Carson City Sheriff's office to have them continue to provide sworn for the fifth grade classes due to prescription drug take back days and also due to community events.
[3:21:05] And programs that we've been funding you just tell me what sworn stands for.
[3:21:11] So I do not know the acronym of sworn chair.
[3:21:16] It is, I believe it is a newer version of Dare that is actually evident in that base.
[3:21:21] I think that's what I figured that so I'm substance, I don't know, anyway, thank you.
[3:21:30] When COVID hit all of the programs that were school-based just collapsed, the school district employees created a offshoot of that Dare program.
[3:21:42] It is not dare specific, but it's more tailored to the dare platform and Carson City students directly.
[3:21:51] My homework is to find out.
[3:21:55] I'll report back.
[3:21:57] Thank you.
[3:21:57] I don't believe sworn as an acronym for anything.
[3:22:00] I think it's just the name of the program correct.
[3:22:03] It's just okay.
[3:22:04] That makes sense.
[3:22:05] Thank you.
[3:22:05] Of course.
[3:22:07] If we could.
[3:22:09] The sworn program is a dare inspired student prevention and education pilot initiative designed
[3:22:15] to help pre-adolescent children make healthy choices and avoid risky behavior, core philosophies
[3:22:21] built around the POSNIC Act decision making model and go on, would you like more?
[3:22:28] Good job.
[3:22:29] It is not an acronym.
[3:22:31] Thank you.
[3:22:33] And current programs that we are funding that are ending in September and I want to note that
[3:22:37] ending in September because these organizations have declined funding, not because we are not choosing
[3:22:42] not to fund them. Boys and girls club, we are currently funding them to do two good for drug
[3:22:46] classes. That is a program that we will also continue within the schools. They have declined
[3:22:51] funding because they had received their own grant, which is amazing and so we're happy to support
[3:22:54] them with that. In Carson City, juvenile services is doing several different programs right now
[3:22:59] in their Saturday programs and working with youth and parents. They have declined funding because
[3:23:04] their newer priority that they're looking to get grants for is to continue to fund their
[3:23:09] licensed drug and alcohol counselor, our funding does not allow us to support that because
[3:23:13] it is treatment based and we are prevention solely. So we're really excited. I look forward
[3:23:19] to continuing to work more in Carson City and to work more with all of you. If you have any
[3:23:24] questions, I'm happy to take them at this time.
[3:23:30] It's not a question, but I really appreciate what
[3:23:32] doing and you know this is so incredibly important and so thank you. Thank you for being such a big
[3:23:40] part of this program and for leading the charge in a really positive way. Thank you very much.
[3:23:47] You know I'll just say if I mean I'm not speaking for everybody but personally if something I can do
[3:23:52] as a board member please let me know I'm sure we all feel the same way so. Thank you very much
[3:23:56] I really appreciate it.
[3:24:00] Yes. If you have any name ideas, please send them my way.
[3:24:06] What have you sent her so far? I have a cup you don't want to say before you?
[3:24:10] Yes. How long have you been associated with partnership Douglas County?
[3:24:15] So I've been with partnership Douglas County actually just hit my 10 year anniversary.
[3:24:19] I've been the executive director for four years. So I started when I was 17 years old.
[3:24:23] was going to win your 10. And I, I was the youngest
[3:24:27] become executive director of a non-profit in Nevada,
[3:24:29] age 23. Thank you. Thank you. And the other question is,
[3:24:36] was there any kind of transition from our prior
[3:24:39] Carson City partnership or is that just like evaporated in? Correct.
[3:24:44] And there was no transition after they closed their
[3:24:47] organization. So full transparency, I was actually funded as a
[3:24:51] to serve intremly until partnership Carson City had kind of made a decision on what was going to happen with their organization.
[3:24:59] I found out.
[3:25:00] Pretty, like close to June 30th, that they were closing their doors, effective immediately, and the state transition to all services to meet July 1st.
[3:25:08] I have many partners here. I've worked with the fact that we worked with you before Dr. Lyons through partnership Douglas County.
[3:25:15] And so I've been working with many nonprofits and partners here to figure out what used to be provided and what is missing within the community.
[3:25:22] So, just to speak their offices are closed, I have no access to any of their prior information.
[3:25:27] Okay, and lastly, I forget the name of the program that the hospital is providing to youth
[3:25:35] in the area, but are you in a position to have any collaborative efforts with them?
[3:25:42] Yes, I actually have been working with Megan Martinez from Behavioral Hope and Melissa Elgis,
[3:25:48] who is part of the hospital as well for their vehicles to change.
[3:25:51] I'm also connected with them for Mallory, they have graciously offered me a meeting or a office space there to place my new Carson City staff that I am hopefully hiring today.
[3:26:01] I have an interview this afternoon.
[3:26:03] I've met with several different nonprofits.
[3:26:06] If there's anyone who has not been in contact with me, I'm happy to connect.
[3:26:10] I live in Carson City, I'm a sixth generation of Adon, so I'm proud to continue to serve our community.
[3:26:15] great got me beat it for are there any other questions or comments? I'll just
[3:26:22] so I don't know. I like be a connection it's all about resourcing and
[3:26:28] bringing people together so invite everyone to be a connection to solve this
[3:26:33] problem. That was kind of my thinking. Let's all get together and help our kids
[3:26:40] Yeah.
[3:26:41] If you adults along the way.
[3:26:42] There's a roll off the tongue.
[3:26:44] Sorry.
[3:26:44] Just as an action.
[3:26:45] Okay.
[3:26:46] Keep them.
[3:26:46] I'm going to put one.
[3:26:48] Oh, I can.
[3:26:49] Yeah.
[3:26:49] Put it around.
[3:26:50] That might be better.
[3:26:52] And it might be better.
[3:26:52] If I can add the superintendent did said me one name in its capital city partnership.
[3:26:56] So that is another one that has been thrown out for consideration.
[3:27:00] Yeah.
[3:27:01] Thank you.
[3:27:01] Have fun with it.
[3:27:04] Great.
[3:27:04] Awesome.
[3:27:05] Thank you all for your time.
[3:27:12] then moving on to item 23B, which is the health officer report, and I would just have a few things to point out.
[3:27:25] And mosquitoes, CDC says that the deadliest animal on earth, y'all know why.
[3:27:35] Malaria, yes, and for our area west style, although we don't necessarily consider that
[3:27:43] as deadly as Malaria, but Zika and also viral, insephalitis, where you get a viral infection
[3:27:51] and it infects the membranes or infects the brain and serious consequences.
[3:28:01] And then pointing out that public trust has dropped quite a bit in the CDC, but local public health agencies, mainly the Board of Health and Carson City Health and Human Services, still have the highest level of confidence among the public.
[3:28:21] So local when there's a face associated with the information being provided, that has a great deal more benefit.
[3:28:32] I'm concerned about the work requirements for our Medicaid population and approximately 23% of Nevadans are enrolled in Medicaid.
[3:28:42] is my understanding that the state has already put out information to those in
[3:28:48] rollies that they'll need to do the work requirements, but, and that yeah. So we're
[3:28:56] going to see problems with that in terms of people losing their coverage.
[3:29:06] And the
[3:29:07] under Nevada, the ranking from the 2026 Kids Count Data Report. One of the things that they say that we need is a early childhood development screening.
[3:29:20] And I want to point out that our clinic did institute that in the last year or so, they had been doing it and had fallen to the wayside, but the clinic is doing that again now.
[3:29:34] with a well child checks and
[3:29:46] that Carson Tahoe has received a grant of nearly three million
[3:29:51] dollars to start a family medicine, most important medicine residency program.
[3:30:00] And what we know is that when we train, educate and provide a residency programs for physicians,
[3:30:08] we're much more likely to retain them in the communities in which they were trained. So hopefully
[3:30:14] that will be a pipeline for primary care here in the Carson and try county, excuse me,
[3:30:20] county area as primary care is number one health is primary. So that is very good news. And then
[3:30:31] wanted to point out that about overdose deaths in Nevada have not declined to the same degree
[3:30:37] that they have nationally, hopefully you'll all be helping with that in the prevention aspect
[3:30:43] and that we have a tremendous amount of mixed use opioids as well as math and vitamins and just
[3:30:50] to remind everyone that we have these telehealth outreaches to adults in no-down teenagers as well,
[3:31:00] about being treated for things like ADHD, adult attention deficit disorder, and most often those
[3:31:08] are endphetamines that are being provided through those telehealth organizations and that's going
[3:31:14] to be a real problem going forward in terms of the number of people that then are going to be
[3:31:19] dictated to M. Fedemines and accessing that cheap with math.
[3:31:28] And we're going to have a lengthy report today from our Epidivision
[3:31:34] regarding seasonal respiratory pathogens,
[3:31:38] of which whatever I have is not one of them, thank you.
[3:31:42] But that the important thing pointed out by this state health officer is that even though
[3:31:52] the vaccine this past season was not right on for the virus that was spreading, it did still show
[3:32:01] significant benefit in preventing hospitalizations and medical visits.
[3:32:07] And so it's worthwhile, a lot of people are like,
[3:32:11] oh, why get it?
[3:32:11] You know, it's not even at the target.
[3:32:14] Well, there is some crossover benefits,
[3:32:16] so it's still worth about to have your flu vaccines.
[3:32:22] I also want to point out that as of August 13th,
[3:32:25] the State Department of Public
[3:32:31] and Behavioral Health achieved their
[3:32:35] public health accreditation board accreditation.
[3:32:41] So we were the first Carson City Health and Human Services
[3:32:44] was the first to be accredited nationally in Nevada,
[3:32:50] but now the state is also being accredited.
[3:32:56] And lastly, these public handouts relative
[3:33:01] to things that are important to know.
[3:33:03] seemed to come late. I got to plan for December now. But now that it's starting to get
[3:33:10] cool, hopefully you don't have to worry about heat-related illnesses. But this is a very informative
[3:33:17] and out about what kind of things to be aware of. In that regard, fans are very important. So
[3:33:25] every summer we see organizations trying to get fans out to people that don't have air conditioning
[3:33:31] and if one has the symptoms to get wet, if you're not sweating and use a fan, use a
[3:33:42] breeze and to now the recommendation is not just cold water but to actually go to
[3:33:48] ice if you have someone who's passed out. So that would conclude if there's any
[3:33:58] questions or comments?
[3:34:02] Great. Overwhelmed y'all. Okay, good. Going on, so just, it would ask for, oh, that's
[3:34:11] discussion only. Okay, good. And then to turn to 23C, discussion only, and that is the staff report
[3:34:21] from Jeannie Freeman, our director of the Carson City Health and Human Services. Good afternoon,
[3:34:28] chair lions and members of the board. I hear to give you Gini Freeman for the record,
[3:34:33] hear to give you the director's report for the September Board of Health, Mia,
[3:34:37] can't believe we're already in September. Next time you see me, we'll be December.
[3:34:42] So just wanted to give you just highlight a few of the biggest things that we have going on.
[3:34:47] I always like to start these with the highlights and the successes of what's happening in the
[3:34:51] department. And as you read, there are a lot of really exciting things that are happening.
[3:34:55] super proud of our staff as they continue to develop their expertise and
[3:35:00] We continue to show the importance of that education and making sure that we're on the cutting edge. So we had David Raul Santos who received his registered environmental health specialist certification from the state. And then we also had Caitlin and Nick who received the certified disease intervention credential and we have Caitlin in the background.
[3:35:22] So super nice to see that they pursue this.
[3:35:25] This isn't just a class that they take online.
[3:35:27] This is something that they actually dedicate their time to.
[3:35:30] And they have to pass this comprehensive exam.
[3:35:32] And if any of you have done comprehensive exams,
[3:35:35] which I know all of you have at some level within your profession,
[3:35:38] they're not fine.
[3:35:39] They're long and they're growing and to be able to complete that
[3:35:42] and pass that on a national level is super great to celebrate.
[3:35:47] We continue to be engaged locally and nationally.
[3:35:49] you see that our deputy director is part of the NATO vaccine advisory group, so being part of
[3:35:56] that national conversation relates to vaccines and what that looks like. We've had a lot of
[3:36:00] transitions that are happening within our agency. One of the things that I wanted to highlight,
[3:36:05] I know she's not here today, but our clinic services manager is retiring today. And so we have lost
[3:36:12] another great one but to a great next step in life and to be able to celebrate and enjoy the time
[3:36:18] her grandchildren is important. So we will miss Tony Orr and but she has made some great
[3:36:25] contributions to our agency and so we're excited for her and her next steps.
[3:36:31] Just a few things that were also there. I know they jump back at all our emergency manager has said
[3:36:36] this before an aborted of supervisors meeting but we are did we are in preparedness month the month of September
[3:36:42] and we're doing the preparedness month collaboration ready set go and then adding the recovery piece
[3:36:47] which is often much longer than the response in and of itself.
[3:36:52] And the month will culminate on September 30th at the community center here from 2 to 5 p.m.
[3:36:58] And we opportunity for the public to interact with a variety of vendors to learn how they can take care of themselves.
[3:37:03] Because they're going to have to be able to take care of themselves for a period of time.
[3:37:06] We are not going to be able to get to everybody in that short 3, 4, 5 day window of time.
[3:37:14] So the first center families are going to have the opportunity to begin their go kit and have some different tools that they're going to get as they visit the different tables within the fair.
[3:37:23] As we do each year, we've been partnering with Carson city school district for the flu vaccinations and then we'll do some community events it's listed there in the report that you'll be able to find us in the community on September 30, which will be at the preparedness fair, so we're giving an opportunity for public to get their flu vaccines if they so choose.
[3:37:40] And then also October 12th will be at the senior center for period of time for which anybody can come to that event and get their flu shot at the senior center doesn't just have to be our seniors.
[3:37:51] And then we also have our walk in clinic on Thursdays every day every Thursday at the health department.
[3:37:58] One is to be sure we gave you a clinic activity because I know that about a year and a half ago we started talking about how our numbers that the clinic were declining.
[3:38:05] We're seeing fewer patients and as you read in the report, we're starting to see that those numbers are rebounding.
[3:38:11] So we're getting more of those patients coming back into the clinic.
[3:38:15] We provide a variety of resources.
[3:38:18] Everything from birth control and STI testing and treatment to the vaccines that are available through the vaccine for children,
[3:38:24] and also what we call the 317 program, which is for those who are uninsured or underinsured.
[3:38:29] But our numbers continue to rebound since the pandemic.
[3:38:33] So during the pandemic, a lot of those numbers declined.
[3:38:36] We are seeing that close to 90% of our clients that are coming into the clinic are at 250% or more below the federal poverty level.
[3:38:45] So the services that we provide at the clinic are actually incredibly beneficial for our patients.
[3:38:51] And in Dr. Lyon's mentioned, we are doing additional services.
[3:38:54] We started back doing the well child visits.
[3:38:56] We collaborate with our WIC program, our women and infants and children program,
[3:39:00] in human services to be able to do some of those well-child visits.
[3:39:02] They're meant for those who don't have a primary care provider,
[3:39:05] but it gives us some preliminary screenings in place
[3:39:08] so that we can identify something early
[3:39:11] and then we can make some referrals out for those services
[3:39:15] that are also available in the community.
[3:39:17] And then we do TV testing.
[3:39:19] I think a lot of people don't know who's who's
[3:39:20] no, that we do that for regular testing.
[3:39:22] Had a phone call yesterday, I was able to say that we are available to do that,
[3:39:26] which is important.
[3:39:29] I'm going to leave you with that because you read the report. I know you didn't, because it's a fantastic report every time. So I'm open for questions.
[3:39:39] I appreciate your humility there.
[3:39:42] The staff do it. I just get to be the one who gets to.
[3:39:45] It's a very good report. I appreciate it. I wanted to point out one thing on page seven and thank Tony or our retiring clinic service manager.
[3:39:55] for the marked increase in our ability to screen force.
[3:40:00] Modorship view of 2keeper30.
[3:40:00] Biffless Nevada ranks right up therefore in the number of slipl labor cases, unfortunately, ranks very high in � cham Ça,
[3:40:10] which means the fetus unborn gets infected before birth.
[3:40:17] And we went from averaging about 50 tests a year because the people had to go off to the lab and be
[3:40:27] to now 800, 400, so eight times what we were doing before,
[3:40:33] because we now have a point of care test,
[3:40:36] so it's done right in the clinic.
[3:40:39] It's offered in it's done right there.
[3:40:42] And then one other thing about the whale child checks,
[3:40:48] is that it's not just about identifying
[3:40:49] something that we can prevent, you know,
[3:40:53] prevention aspect of it and thus refer.
[3:40:56] It's a lot about patient education and parent education
[3:41:00] that's provided it all those different level of childhood
[3:41:03] visits.
[3:41:05] Are you reading to your child, even though before they're
[3:41:08] pre-verbal, that kind of thing.
[3:41:11] That makes a huge difference.
[3:41:13] Those parent education aspects of those well-child visits.
[3:41:19] So anything else, yes, do you know me?
[3:41:21] Jamie, I do have a question on that, FPL graph, do you just track at 250 or do you
[3:41:29] layer it? I mean, do you have all of that, all of the info?
[3:41:33] Jamie Feber for the record. Thank you for the question.
[3:41:36] We don't just track at that point. We layer it. We have citing if you scale.
[3:41:39] We do ask a variety of different questions that are built into that.
[3:41:42] We could do share that with me just that info, not now when you get a chance.
[3:41:45] Absolutely.
[3:41:47] And I assume you track location.
[3:41:50] I'm curious to know the residents of the people we serve by percentage.
[3:41:58] People can get that for me.
[3:41:59] By location.
[3:42:00] And I would be really interested in maybe seeing that routinely with this information.
[3:42:06] I think it's important to know.
[3:42:07] I know we serve the Quad County because you do get compensation from the state for
[3:42:11] doing that or some agreements that we have with some of the counties.
[3:42:13] I just I'm curious what you know percentage of that is because I know we're our community is a medical hub really.
[3:42:20] And you know the hospital sort of drives that.
[3:42:24] So I just curious is just one more little statistic that I think helps us understand where and who we're providing services to.
[3:42:31] So I'd be interested in that.
[3:42:33] So just to clarify, I want to make sure I'll get you the information related to the 250 federal poverty level and then on a regular basis you would like to see the information about who we're serving.
[3:42:43] and their residents. Yeah, just waiting for presenting this, maybe just split that out. Sure,
[3:42:47] there's no anything extra. Sounds good. Thank you. I mean, I know it's extra, but
[3:42:51] happy to do it. Thank you.
[3:42:58] Great. Thank you, Gini. Moving on then to 23D for discussion and this is
[3:43:07] Rachel's treatments report, regarding epidemiology work at the department.
[3:43:21] Good afternoon, Rachel
[3:43:22] freshman for the record. I am the epidemiology and public health preparedness division manager at
[3:43:27] Carson City Health and Human Services. I have had the wonderful opportunity to step into this role in
[3:43:33] the last couple of months, but I'm excited to share this presentation that I was able to complete
[3:43:37] in my epidemiologist role. Before getting started, I wanted to give a couple of shout outs and
[3:43:44] highlights to my team. I'm very excited. We had just hired in our epidemiologist position,
[3:43:50] Melanie Sandquist. She's a couple of rows behind me so she's getting trained and getting
[3:43:55] going and then also wanted to highlight my public health investigators, Nick and Caitlin,
[3:44:00] without the work that they do every day. I wouldn't be able to compile this information and
[3:44:04] describe the health of our community for you all. So what I will be doing today is providing an overview
[3:44:10] of the 2025 26 Carson City influenza season. In addition to some after-season strategies and
[3:44:17] as we are quickly approaching this next respiratory season which actually begins in less than a month.
[3:44:29] So, like I said, this report will be focusing on influenza-like illness.
[3:44:35] I will be referring to this as ILI and confirmed influenza diagnoses.
[3:44:39] So, what ILI encompasses are local emergency department and urgent care visits,
[3:44:44] where someone presents with a respiratory infection with a fever, cough, and or sore throat,
[3:44:50] and they've had a symptom onset within the last 10 days.
[3:44:54] In addition to these overall trends,
[3:44:56] I'll also highlight some age-specific impacts
[3:44:58] and severe flu outcomes.
[3:45:00] Some data sources utilize for this report includes essence, our syndromic surveillance system platform, where local facilities report ISI, Nevada Epitrax, our state surveillance system, where we receive electronic laboratory results, and also the Nevada State Demographer, where we receive population estimates for carcin city by year.
[3:45:21] So, nationally, the 25 to 26 season was classified as moderate severity by CDC.
[3:45:27] If you all remember, this last season was our first severe flu season that we had had since
[3:45:32] 2017 to 2018.
[3:45:35] So, we did see a little bit of a less severe season.
[3:45:38] This is based on the proportion of ILI visits to overall emergency department and urgent care
[3:45:43] visits, flu associated hospitalizations, and flu related deaths.
[3:45:47] A newly-emerged variant of influenza A referred to a subclaimed K which is this variant that was mentioned that was not included in this last season's flu vaccine did contribute to a large increase in illness and hospitalizations in late December to early January.
[3:46:05] This led to hospitalizations nearly doubling during this time, but these quickly decreased and remained low for the rest of the season.
[3:46:12] Locally, Carson City saw elevated ILI activity during the season with visits exceeding expected trends.
[3:46:19] Our younger age groups, those age 0 to 4 and 5 to 24 years old, made up the highest proportion of diagnosed influenza cases,
[3:46:27] while our older adults, those 65 and up accounted for the most influenza associated hospitalizations.
[3:46:36] As I highlighted before, here's the definition of ILI again for you all.
[3:46:41] These visits are reported for Carson City based on the patient's county of resident at the time that they are seen at an emergency department or urgent care.
[3:46:50] So that's how we engage that being reflective of Carson City.
[3:46:55] As shown in figure one on the screen, the ILI rate for Carson City shown in the dark blue color consistently exceeded both the expected rate shown in gray and the four year average shown in light blue.
[3:47:07] This season's peak occurred during week 52 or around the end of December with 10.3 ILI visits for 10,000 population.
[3:47:15] This surpassed the expected rate for your average in the Nevada ILI rate, which I have here shown in orange.
[3:47:22] This was similar to national trends where Carson City saw a large increase in ILI at the end of 2025 with rates returning to lower than expected levels for the remainder of the season.
[3:47:33] this being from the January 2 May.
[3:47:38] Really quickly, I wanted to make a verbal correction to this slide.
[3:47:41] This is located in your packet on page 200 and 2. This first bullet point has an error in
[3:47:47] it should state 2025 to 2026. I apologize for that on your end.
[3:47:53] As shown in a figure 2, this season had the highest weekly total of ioli, shown in dark blue,
[3:47:59] compared to the prior four influenza seasons. However, this season had the second lowest
[3:48:04] cumulative total, suggesting mild flu activity outside of the weeks that saw higher activity.
[3:48:12] Across the season, an average of 63 percent of weekly ILI visits were identified in emergency
[3:48:18] care settings, representing more than six out of every 10 ILI visits each week.
[3:48:23] During periods of high respiratory activity, an increased demand for emergency care can place
[3:48:28] an additional strain on our health care systems. This is something to be a little bit mindful about.
[3:48:32] So, before you go on, can I, well, that one works too.
[3:48:37] It's a very narrow period and a very interesting peak, which you just commented on in terms
[3:48:43] of challenging healthcare centers to treat that number of people in such a small amount of
[3:48:50] time.
[3:48:52] Did you have any analysis or thoughts or opinions on, I mean, it's one of the more, it's actually
[3:48:59] the most concentrated.
[3:49:01] If you have an idea as to why that happened, such a short period of time, I mean, it's right
[3:49:07] at the end of the year, so family gathering is always an issue, but that happens every
[3:49:12] year.
[3:49:14] So, I'm just curious, maybe the numbers in the past years because of COVID and isolation
[3:49:18] sort of broaden that base out, but it was a question I had because it just seemed unusually
[3:49:25] dense over a short period of time.
[3:49:28] Yes.
[3:49:28] Rachel freshman for the record.
[3:49:29] Thank you for that question. I have a couple of thoughts. I could also, you know, these are just kind of some some assumptions that I'm making based on other trends that we saw nationwide.
[3:49:43] So the variant that I mentioned before that was the subclaimed K variant for influenza A. We did see that traveling a lot through Europe earlier in the season.
[3:49:55] And then when it kind of started hitting the United States, we were seen in a lot of...
[3:50:00] The surrounding states, large increases of IOI and it just kind of coming, well, I'm so sorry.
[3:50:06] Talking with my hands. It was just kind of having an R-way, I'm sorry.
[3:50:13] I'm not used to speaking to you, Mike. So we were able to see that kind of coming R-way and what we're kind of hypothesizing is that we saw a large increase in just transmission of this specific variant.
[3:50:29] Um, some preliminary information we had about it was that it was a lot more transmissible, and so, you know, it may have just exacerbated what we usually see during around that time that we have, um, you know, typical family gatherings. There's a lot of special events going on, people are getting out and about, but they're also inside. And that's a lot easier for our respiratory illnesses to spread more easily between people. So.
[3:50:53] Well, it's kind of always the case, too.
[3:50:55] So, I mean, the last year wasn't the only year
[3:50:58] where people were concentrated inside
[3:51:00] over a short period of time.
[3:51:01] But the other question that just came to mind is,
[3:51:04] I know back during COVID, in the later parts of COVID,
[3:51:11] late 2020, maybe early in the 21,
[3:51:13] the city was doing testing of effluent.
[3:51:18] To sort of monitor progress, peaks, valleys
[3:51:20] of communicable diseases such as that, or viruses. Do you know if the city is still doing that?
[3:51:27] Do you have any idea? Do you have any idea? And are you getting that information? Do you get that?
[3:51:37] Gene Farmer the record. Yes, the city is still testing. They do a weekly test and it goes to the
[3:51:42] lab and they take a look at that. They look at a variety of different communicable diseases.
[3:51:47] They're looking for measles, COVID, influenza. The challenge comes is that probably by the time
[3:51:54] that we get the results, we're already seeing the spike in the health care system.
[3:51:58] So you find out about it other ways.
[3:52:03] What's the travel time on sewage curve?
[3:52:06] No.
[3:52:07] There's a former deputy.
[3:52:08] I mean, it's not days, right?
[3:52:12] It's.
[3:52:13] It's.
[3:52:15] Okay.
[3:52:16] I mean, if you're only testing once a week, I guess that really is just sort of a benchmark.
[3:52:20] It can't be much more.
[3:52:21] you'd almost have to test daily for it to have any meaning.
[3:52:24] Correct.
[3:52:25] I guess it's just good to know that that resource is there
[3:52:29] so that if we're starting to see a spike
[3:52:32] that you could re-engage it at a more frequent testing
[3:52:36] interval to help track the potential severity.
[3:52:41] Yes, we currently receive a very small sub-grant
[3:52:43] from the state in order to be able to do wastewater surveillance,
[3:52:46] associated, and but it's more about reporting it to the state
[3:52:49] them to be able to look at overall surveillance, but it's not as robust of a process as we see
[3:52:56] down in Southern Nevada. And what they've been doing, our water system, our sewer system is
[3:53:04] combined. Like, it's all there. It's not as unique as we see in Southern Nevada where they can identify
[3:53:09] specific neighborhoods that are tied to certain treatment plants and so forth. Yeah, I mean, I get
[3:53:14] I don't think for us it's that big a deal to know what street it came from, right?
[3:53:19] I mean, I think the idea is to be able to, I think if we're seeing, if we get another
[3:53:25] pandemic or even epidemic, it might be a step we could take to help ramp up or at least plan
[3:53:35] to ramp up.
[3:53:37] I mean, I think it could be a planning tool, I guess it's just what I'm saying, and
[3:53:40] it's nice to know that the ability is there because if we're doing it once a week,
[3:53:43] It's just a matter of frequency them to make that repetitive, right?
[3:53:48] Correct.
[3:53:48] I would like you to take that back out of the universe, though, and not speak that.
[3:53:53] I said, yes.
[3:53:54] I said, yes.
[3:53:55] Thank you.
[3:53:55] I said, isn't it?
[3:53:56] Our whole world is planning for gifts.
[3:53:59] It is September.
[3:54:00] It is the if month.
[3:54:01] It is the if month.
[3:54:02] And what could happen month?
[3:54:04] You're talking me out of of what you should be promoting.
[3:54:08] So I would be going out one thing about wastewater is that we are shedding virus frequently
[3:54:16] with a lot of these respiratory illnesses before we have symptoms.
[3:54:21] So I think there's still some value, even though it's being done once a week, that it could
[3:54:26] give you a heads up before you're seeing it in the emergency room.
[3:54:34] I mean, some serious viruses are 14, 7, 10, 14 to incubation periods, right?
[3:54:40] So, well, yeah, incubation period in terms of when you, when you're, when you're
[3:54:43] quote infectious, there's, it's usually a smaller period of time, but can be
[3:54:48] before you have symptoms yourself.
[3:54:54] Thank you.
[3:54:56] Thank you.
[3:54:56] Thank you for that.
[3:54:57] Rachel freshman for the record.
[3:54:58] in addition to the company.
[3:55:00] I did want to highlight that we have been utilizing that information that we get from our wastewater surveillance, and that has been included in our weekly respiratory reports that we share two stakeholders in the community.
[3:55:13] What we've been seeing there's been a lot of discussion on how in epidemiology we can use that to our favor and what exactly it's telling us, because there's a lot of different variables that go into that.
[3:55:25] efficacy usually, you know, when you're also drawing those samples and what we can
[3:55:31] lean from that information. And typically what we do see is that it kind of, I believe
[3:55:37] the doctor lines had touched on this. It kind of precedes those surges that we see in
[3:55:42] medical facilities so it can kind of be something that if we see very high levels of
[3:55:47] something in the wastewater we can most likely assume that we may see an increase in
[3:55:51] I alive visits in the next couple of weeks and touching on this graph again just as I had a little bit more time to think so as you can see with the trend from this last year how we had that really stark increase and then it dropped off really dramatically due to a very highly transmissible variant the ability for it to attack it in fact a lot of people at one time it's very
[3:56:21] to have had such an impact on the population because people do have a level of immune response
[3:56:28] to that afterward where they are protected for a certain amount of time, but I will say that
[3:56:32] we see it where people can have multiple influenza A infections throughout the season or they
[3:56:38] become infected with influenza A at the beginning and they get Type B later in the season.
[3:56:43] So just to provide a little bit more background information on that is I continue to move through these
[3:56:48] lines. When we're discussing confirmed influenza cases, these include individuals that had
[3:56:54] either laboratory-based or rapid diagnostic testing. In Carson City, we had 955 confirmed influenza
[3:57:02] diagnoses reported during this last season. Throughout the season, the most common influenza
[3:57:07] variant was influenza A, not sub-type, which you can see in Figure 3 shown as the darker blue line.
[3:57:13] This also coincides that seasonal peak that we had seen with ILI as well, and this occurred
[3:57:20] in week 52 until late December and declined for the rest of the season with a small increase
[3:57:25] around week five, which is early February.
[3:57:29] Weekly influenza B cases shown by the purple line reached a peak of 38 cases during week five
[3:57:34] in early February and decreased throughout the rest of the season. And this seasonal trend,
[3:57:40] It seemed locally reflects typical distribution that we see during flu seasons, so type A usually is the more dominant in the late fall to early winter and type B usually appears later with a milder impact in late winter to early spring.
[3:57:59] So, when we're talking about confirmed influenza cases, the burden of influenza vary greatly by age group.
[3:58:05] Figure 4 on the screen shows age-specific rates, so this is the number of influenza cases per
[3:58:11] age group population. So for example, if we're looking at zero to four, if we had 500 cases,
[3:58:16] and then we had a population of 1,000, it would be 500 over 1,000 and then times the population.
[3:58:23] So children aged zero to four years, shown by the green bar, had the highest age-specific influenza rate
[3:58:29] of 440 cases per 10,000 population followed by individuals ages 5 to 24 shown in the orange bar
[3:58:36] with 309 cases per 10,000 population. These elevated rates observed in these groups,
[3:58:43] suggests they may be an important group for prevention and control efforts.
[3:58:47] This can include influenza vaccination and infection prevention measures in both child care
[3:58:52] settings and our schools. Higher rates among children and young adults may also contribute
[3:58:57] to transmission within households and our broader community, including to individuals at increased
[3:59:02] risk for influenza-associated complications.
[3:59:08] When we're discussing severe flu outcomes,
[3:59:10] this does include influenza-associated hospitalizations and deaths due to an influenza infection.
[3:59:17] Hospitalized cases are defined as individuals receiving inpatient care for at least 24 hours
[3:59:22] who have a positive test and are experiencing symptoms. Key information is collected to understand
[3:59:27] factors that make contribute to their illness severity, including age, vaccination status, and underlying
[3:59:33] medical clinicians. During this last season, there were 49 influenza-associated hospitalizations,
[3:59:39] which was a significant decrease from the 119th week in the prior season.
[3:59:45] Figure 5 on the screen displays the distribution of these hospitalizations throughout the season,
[3:59:50] comparing the 25 to 26 seasons, shown in blue to the prior season, shown in purple.
[3:59:56] hospitalizations peak during week 53 at the end of December.
[4:00:00] Number, early January, with 14 hospitalizations and decreased remaining low throughout the rest of the season.
[4:00:08] Typically, when we are looking at hospitalizations, the age groups that were most concerned about are young children and our older adults.
[4:00:16] Figure 6 displays the distribution of these hospitalizations for the season by age group.
[4:00:21] Shown in green, adult 65, and up accounted for nearly 6 out of every 10 hospitalizations.
[4:00:28] These were lower in the younger age groups with only 4 out of every 10 when you combine the 0 to 4 and 5 to 24 year age groups.
[4:00:37] Based on available data for these hospitalized patients, fewer than 2 out of every 10 had received a seasonal influenza vaccination prior to their illness onset.
[4:00:48] There are additional risk factors that may predict more severe flu outcomes for individuals that become ill.
[4:00:55] These can include but are not limited to chronic health conditions such as obesity, COPD, asthma, diabetes,
[4:01:02] a weakened immune system or any medications that they take and also pregnancy.
[4:01:08] More than 8 out of every 10 hospitalized patients reported at least one health condition that may have increased
[4:01:13] their risk of severe outcomes due to influenza.
[4:01:16] And this is shown in figure 7 where the underlying conditions are broken down by type among
[4:01:22] hospitalized patients. I meant to include a little asterix at the bottom, which was in the report,
[4:01:29] but the sum of these percentages may equal higher than 100% mostly because among those hospitalized
[4:01:36] patients we had people reporting more than one condition.
[4:01:41] And shown in grade nearly 7 out of every
[4:01:43] 10 reported various conditions which were not captured by the specific reporting categories
[4:01:48] and thus we classified those as having another condition. And among those hospitalized,
[4:01:54] we did have one in 10 individuals that unfortunately did pass away due to influenza.
[4:02:05] And so looking ahead, considering these are sorry, some major takeaways for this season include
[4:02:11] influenza activity increasing drastically in late 2025, but quickly decreasing throughout
[4:02:17] rest of the season with only small increases being reported sporadically. Children and younger adults
[4:02:23] had the highest rate of confirmed influenza, raising concerns about additional transmission in
[4:02:28] school and child care settings. Hospitalizations were most common among older adults and
[4:02:33] individuals with underlying health conditions. Our local activity mirage state and national trends
[4:02:39] with elevated ioli and late 2025. And data from this last season highlights the importance of
[4:02:45] preventive strategies and intervention ahead of the upcoming respiratory season.
[4:02:51] Considering these main takeaways from the previous season, Carson City Health and Human Services,
[4:02:56] we'll continue providing school-based influenza vaccination opportunities for the upcoming season.
[4:03:03] This improves access among populations that consistently experience the highest age-specific
[4:03:08] influenza rates and this supports efforts to reduce transmission within schools, households,
[4:03:13] and the broader community. We will continue to prioritize outreach for influenza vaccination among
[4:03:19] older adults and those with underlying health conditions as these groups remain the highest
[4:03:23] for severe influenza illness and hospitalization. Additionally, also emphasizing the influenza
[4:03:30] vaccination provides protection against hospitalization for healthy adults. We will collaborate
[4:03:36] with health care facilities and laboratories to increase submission of specimens to laboratories
[4:03:41] that perform sub-typing. This will help us improve surveillance of circulating strains and detect new influenza variants early that are in our community.
[4:03:52] We will increase public communication messaging throughout the year to promote staying home when sick,
[4:03:57] seeking care early for worsening symptoms and the option of obtaining a yearly influenza vaccination as a tool to reduce the risk of severe illness.
[4:04:06] And lastly, we will develop messaging that clarifies when to seek emergency urgent or primary care to promote informed care seeking,
[4:04:14] preserving that emergency department capacity, and ensuring timely care for patients with severe illness.
[4:04:22] And with that being said, thank you again for the opportunity to be able to share this information with you all,
[4:04:26] and I'd be happy to answer any other questions this time.
[4:04:31] Thank you, Rachel. I really liked the more communication about when to stay home, what to do at home.
[4:04:40] When to seek early care, which would be if you have a fever, or if you have any of those conditions that place you had increased risk,
[4:04:50] and then developing the information about when you're sick, cover your cough, wear a mask,
[4:04:58] So
[4:05:00] So those kind of outreach information to the public would be helpful.
[4:05:08] Thank you. Anybody else with comments?
[4:05:12] No?
[4:05:13] Thank you.
[4:05:14] See what science does for you?
[4:05:15] Give to all kinds of graphs.
[4:05:28] And now we'll hear in 23e for discussion.
[4:05:33] this is Candace Harvey who is our manager for our environmental health division and I want to
[4:05:43] say an advance. I really appreciated this report. It was very thorough in covering all the
[4:05:49] different things that environmental health is doing.
[4:05:57] My presentation says good morning but
[4:05:59] good afternoon. Candace Harvey Environmental Health Manager at Carson City Health and Human Services
[4:06:04] for the record. I first want to start my presentation by saying thank you for this opportunity
[4:06:09] and thank you to Jeannie for allowing me to present environmental health activities in 2025.
[4:06:19] So, the goal of the environmental health branch report was to provide a comprehensive overview
[4:06:23] of what environmental health is and how carson city health and human services provides those services
[4:06:28] to the community. The environmental health branch focuses on preventing harmful environmental
[4:06:34] exposures where the community eats, lives, works, and plays. Environmental health is woven into
[4:06:41] the fabric of the Carson City community by protecting Carson City families and visitors and interacting
[4:06:48] with local businesses and operators and lastly helping homeowners and contractors build systems
[4:06:54] to last. Environmental health partners with many governmental agencies, including Nevada Department
[4:07:02] of agriculture, the newly established Nevada health authority, Nevada division of environmental
[4:07:08] protection, Nevada division of water resources, and last but not least surrounding local health
[4:07:13] jurisdictions.
[4:07:17] Those are external partners, but internally we have continuous teamwork with
[4:07:21] all of our internal departments as well. This includes Carson City Community and Economic Development,
[4:07:27] Carson City Public Works, Carson City Fire Department and Emergency Management,
[4:07:32] and of course, Carson City Park's Rec and Open Space.
[4:07:35] With the support from these partners,
[4:07:37] CCHHS strives to meet the metrics of a
[4:07:40] successful environmental public health agency
[4:07:43] while maintaining positive relationships with the community.
[4:07:51] The 2025 Annual Environmental Health Report
[4:07:53] described eight of the 10 environmental health programs listed above.
[4:07:58] Each program has specific state and local
[4:08:01] regulations associated as well as national standards.
[4:08:04] The 2025 Annual Report reviews these regulations provides an overview of what inspections were performed for each program and then lastly what violations were observed during these inspections.
[4:08:18] In 2025, the environmental health team conducted 1,443 inspections.
[4:08:25] This included routine inspections, complaint investigations,
[4:08:29] pre-opening inspections, construction inspections, and information consultations.
[4:08:34] The majority of this work was conducted by just two environmental health specialists.
[4:08:44] In the report includes two graphs that I would like to highlight for our largest environmental health program, our retail food program.
[4:08:51] This also includes temporary food establishments.
[4:08:55] Anually permitted retail food program establishments
[4:08:59] make up and create 81% of our required annual inspections.
[4:09:04] Since 2020 there has been a steady and significant increase
[4:09:07] in the number of food permits issued by CCHHS.
[4:09:11] The graphs provided show there's been an 80% increase
[4:09:14] in the number of annual food establishments in Carson City since 2020.
[4:09:18] over a 1300% increase in the number of temporary food establishment inspections in Carson City since 2021.
[4:09:28] This is an important not only for the impacts to workload for staff, but also to show the growth in the community.
[4:09:38] I'm glad we already broke the egg on sewage talk. I'm here to talk about it a little bit more just before lunch.
[4:09:46] So, in additional program, I wanted to highlight from the report is our individual sewage
[4:09:51] disposal system program or a septic system program, oversight of septic systems, protect
[4:09:58] groundwater, service water.
[4:10:00] And our drinking water for our community. The picture provided gives you a glimpse of the areas in Carson City that utilize well, septics or both.
[4:10:10] Today, there are currently almost 1,800 properties that rely on wells for drinking water or septic systems for wastewater disposal.
[4:10:18] I wanted to highlight this program for two reasons. One, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average lifespan for a septic system is 30 to 50 years.
[4:10:31] That means that homes built between 1976 and 1996 utilized septic systems and are reaching their anticipated life expectancy.
[4:10:38] Secondly, new systems being installed on undeveloped properties or properties with failed
[4:10:45] septic systems, post certain challenges during the review process.
[4:10:49] These challenges include parcel size, size of the home, topography or slope of the parcel,
[4:10:57] soil characteristics or barriers within the soil profile and set back requirements.
[4:11:02] The added complexity of these systems require more communication, collaboration, and time with contractors and engineers and homeowners.
[4:11:11] Environmental health looks forward to further supporting the community with these specific projects.
[4:11:19] Lastly, I would like to highlight a few of our 2025 successes and our 2026 improvements.
[4:11:25] The main success included increased communication with the community.
[4:11:30] This was via environmental health newsletters, recall notifications via email, and educational
[4:11:36] materials provided to operators for their day-to-day activities and to make their businesses
[4:11:42] more successful.
[4:11:44] We have only received positive feedback regarding this communication and the increased communication
[4:11:49] methods.
[4:11:50] Additionally, 2025 showed an increase in efficiency and effectiveness of inspections.
[4:11:56] This was achieved by increased training and exposure for the environmental health specialists
[4:12:01] and as a part of a broad approach to provide even better customer service for our operators
[4:12:07] in our community.
[4:12:09] 2026 improvements include focusing on data collection and data metrics for all programs.
[4:12:15] I specifically would like to highlight that starting the beginning of this year we've specifically entered or started entering our temporary food establishment inspections and violation and observations into our system.
[4:12:28] The goal of this is to be able to provide more specific educational materials for these types of vendors and temporary businesses to allow the inspection process to be more smooth and more efficient.
[4:12:43] CCHHS has continued to increase public education and outreach materials.
[4:12:48] Something new that we did this year was we provided operators, temporary operators,
[4:12:53] and inspection checklist to help them be prepared and know what to expect on the day of inspection.
[4:13:00] We are hopeful. We've only received positive feedback regarding the checklist and we're hopeful that this will help
[4:13:05] operators and the public know what to look for and what is needed to be done on the day of.
[4:13:12] Last but not least, environmental health continues to make improvements towards meeting the Food and Drug Administration retail food programs standards.
[4:13:20] I look forward to giving you an update next year on what that looks like in our quality improvement.
[4:13:26] As Jeanne previously stated in the director's report, as of June 2026, for the first time since 2022, environmental health is fully staffed with registered environmental health specialists.
[4:13:37] This is a huge accomplishment for our team and allows us to further, further be available and improve the environmental health programs in Carson City.
[4:13:50] As I close the presentation today, I would also like to offer my deepest gratitude to the environmental health team and our data analyst Rachel Hakeman.
[4:13:58] Without their work and efforts, this presentation and report would have been made possible but not as easy.
[4:14:04] So I really appreciate all of the effort and work that they put into that, and I'm very proud and honored to be a part of the team.
[4:14:14] Are there any, is there anything additionally that you would like to see in the next reports or any data I can provide and or do you have any questions?
[4:14:26] I would point out that with the information of one six Americans annually, and stuff with a, what
[4:14:37] So lay people refer to as food poisoning and technically referred to as a foodborne illness.
[4:14:43] That means three of us in the last year in this room were affected by foodborne illness.
[4:14:50] And hopefully it was too bad because we're all still here.
[4:14:55] And so obviously not all of those are acquired at a rescue.
[4:15:00] A lot of unquestioned or through cottage foods. Is a significant problem that requires a lot of diligence and staying on top of.
[4:15:10] I had a question for you. On the cottage food aspect, what seems to be the most common problem that you're seeing there. We're seeing so much more of this cottage food stuff.
[4:15:20] But what is the common problem that you're seeing in the college food industry?
[4:15:25] So I wouldn't necessarily call it a problem.
[4:15:27] But what we see most often is that recipes are just copy and pasted from the internet
[4:15:34] without further review of the ingredients or the fact that they are perishable or non-perishable.
[4:15:43] So we have to review every recipe that comes in because we want to protect the citizens
[4:15:48] in the community and our visitors from purchasing these items and ensuring that they don't require
[4:15:53] refrigeration or that they are from an approved source. So the cottage industry, like you said,
[4:16:00] Dr. Lyons is booming. I'm very happy for them, but it is a lot of effort on the team to ensure
[4:16:05] that what you buy and what you purchase out of farmers market or a craft fair is actually safe for consumption.
[4:16:13] So what may look good, but you want to be sure. Some of these recipes are very creative
[4:16:18] and they look very, very delicious.
[4:16:21] We don't get to taste test as part of the job, though.
[4:16:25] Thank you.
[4:16:27] Jeannie, I would ask you to update the Board of Health regarding
[4:16:34] the change previously before Candace joined us or Dustin
[4:16:42] at one point was overseeing both Epi and Environmental Health.
[4:16:47] And now that's changed where Rachel of Epi is overseeing preparedness.
[4:16:57] So just a little bit about your thoughts about those changes.
[4:17:01] Thank you very much for the record.
[4:17:03] Yes, Carson City Health and Human Services always has to take a look at what our efficiencies are.
[4:17:08] And we take a look at what grant funding comes in and the other funding sources that we have available to us.
[4:17:14] And previously the organization had prior to COVID, it was at be an environmental health that
[4:17:21] were combined. And part of that was because the staff that was in place had the expertise
[4:17:26] in at be an environmental health. When COVID occurred, we separated those into two separate
[4:17:33] divisions, and we had a specific epidemiology division, and then we had an environmental health division.
[4:17:39] As things continue to change, the organization has to continue to evolve to make sure
[4:17:44] that we're meeting the needs of the community,
[4:17:45] those foundational public health services,
[4:17:48] and to also meet the intent of the board
[4:17:49] to make sure that we're ensuring the quality
[4:17:51] of life of our residents, our visitors,
[4:17:55] and everybody else who gets to enjoy Carfson City.
[4:17:58] One of the changes that we made recently
[4:18:00] was to have the public health preparedness division
[4:18:03] and the Epidivisions become combined.
[4:18:06] And you might say, well, if you had people combined
[4:18:09] and then you separated them, why would you combine again?
[4:18:12] It actually makes a lot of sense
[4:18:13] for epidemiology and public health preparedness to be combined because the vast majority of emergencies
[4:18:19] that would occur from a public health standpoint are going to be diseased related.
[4:18:24] Not saying that anything else wouldn't potentially be a disaster, it could be, but when we
[4:18:28] look at where that would be having those two entities combined, they work hand in hand,
[4:18:33] almost every day prior to the combination of those two branches in what that looks like.
[4:18:39] But it's not flip-int. We don't make those decisions overnight. We have a lot of thought that goes with that.
[4:18:45] We make them based upon not just what the funding looks like or what somebody's expertise is,
[4:18:51] but what does that really mean for the overall service to the community and so forth?
[4:18:56] Both of those branches serve multiple counties through the work that they do in the delegations that they have with the state.
[4:19:01] So again, it makes sense for them to come together.
[4:19:04] they work in support of one another on a day-to-day basis and then they are able to share that information out with multiple partners including the Quad County healthcare coalition as well as other entities that they both mutually serve.
[4:19:19] So there's a lot of efficiency as well with that, but the fact that they're housed together they work together on a regular basis and made a lot of sense for that to be there.
[4:19:29] Rachel, what the freshman was previously in our epidemiologist role, the one position that we had in epidemiology at that point in time outside of our disease investigators.
[4:19:39] She was willing to take on that challenge. She applied for that challenge to be that combined unit.
[4:19:45] Rachel has been in her role since July 10 as the epidemiology and public health preparedness manager and I can tell you that the way that she's able to bring people together in such a quick fashion.
[4:19:56] She's a model for many of us when it comes to that.
[4:20:00] Work. And so really glad to have her in that role. And then being able to have Laney come on, as our new epidemiologists coming out of the UNLVs, epidemiology fellowship program, really comes to show with that dynamic of how we will continue to grow.
[4:20:15] And the ideas that are already coming out of that combined branch about how they can expand into the community to make a stronger and really that trusted partner, which was one of the major points of feedback that we had from the board during our strategic planning was
[4:20:29] what is CCHH is this identity, what are your roles,
[4:20:33] what are your responsibilities, and are you the trusted partner?
[4:20:37] So they're already putting that into practice
[4:20:39] with the work that they're doing.
[4:20:41] So we're very excited to have that combination
[4:20:43] and to have Rachel leading that.
[4:20:46] Thank you.
[4:20:46] And then, Gini, I would just point out also
[4:20:49] there was some funding loss relative to,
[4:20:55] I don't remember having another manager or division manager or something.
[4:21:02] So there are absent flows within grant funding all the time.
[4:21:08] Definitely we're in some challenges right now because there's changes that are happening at the federal level,
[4:21:12] but every time an administration comes through there are changes that happen at a federal level.
[4:21:17] So public health, if you want to use a word to describe us, we need to be flexible.
[4:21:21] we're always flexible. We're looking at what's happening. We need to look at wastewater.
[4:21:25] I wish wastewater retails the story about funding, but it doesn't. There's more than 14 days
[4:21:30] that take us to take us there. But when we look at what's there, we know that funding for public health
[4:21:38] is a surge and a resurgence that happens, right? So it, when there's something that's a pandemic or
[4:21:45] there's something that's major that happens, there's a bunch of funding that's there. And then we
[4:21:50] to handle that and then we tend to pull it away.
[4:21:53] This we're in that same cycle.
[4:21:55] And so we know where we're at.
[4:21:57] We are, I have an incredible management team.
[4:22:01] I don't know how to tell you how lucky I am
[4:22:03] with the management team that I have
[4:22:05] that we sit together and we talk about strategy,
[4:22:09] but we're not looking at the strategy of today.
[4:22:11] If we're looking at the strategy of today, we are behind.
[4:22:14] We are looking at the strategy long term.
[4:22:17] And again, that comes back to,
[4:22:19] You had Ms. Singer here today who was talking to you about the services that they do.
[4:22:23] There is no reason for us to be in that realm.
[4:22:26] They do it well. They have the tools to do that.
[4:22:29] We are not going to try to do everything.
[4:22:31] We have been asked by all of you to make sure that we are efficient
[4:22:34] and to make sure that we are targeting the areas that we are good at.
[4:22:39] And identifying where the gaps are.
[4:22:41] We may or may not be the ones to fill that,
[4:22:43] but we are making sure that we are coming in line
[4:22:45] and meeting that mission associated with the city.
[4:22:49] Thank you, Jeanne.
[4:22:51] Everyone to know that I gave her no heads up on those two questions.
[4:22:58] And did anyone have anything else for Candace, for Jeanne?
[4:23:06] Thank you.
[4:23:08] And with that then, we turn to public comment.
[4:23:15] Everybody looks at you, Jeanne.
[4:23:20] Thank you.
[4:23:21] And with that, I will adjourn.
[4:23:22] Thank you very much.