[0:00] Motion passes.
We'll have a hearing on the alcohol
[0:04] beverage control division small brewer
offsite intake application for brew lab
[0:11] 101 and brew do.
This is a a hearing required by state
[0:18] law. Is there anyone that wishes to
speak?
[0:24] » Good morning. My name is Kylo Stoker.
I'm with New Mexico Liquor Lices LLC.
[0:28] I'm here on behalf of the applicant for
lab 101. I don't have any um anything to
[0:33] say, but I am here standing for any
questions if you guys have any for the
[0:37] applicant.
[0:41] » Mr.
If you swear in any folks who are going
[0:45] to testify,
[0:54] » Mr. Attorney, what's the language for
that swearing?
[0:58] penalty of perjury. That the testimony
I'm about to give is the letter. Yeah,
[1:02] penalty. That's right. Okay, ma'am. Did
you hear that?
[1:06] » Yes, sir. My right hand is raised.
>> Can I swear again?
[1:10] » Okay. Thank you. Now, go ahead.
[1:17] » Okay.
>> Anybody else wish to speak?
[1:24] Are there any questions for the
alcoholic beverage commission?
[1:31] Going once,
[1:35] going twice. Okay. LS are all
points of the application satisfactory
[1:42] to
[1:50] the applicant.
>> Oh, I thought she said
[1:59] That's all they want to say. They don't
want to explain anything.
[2:06] » I don't think so.
[2:12] Going third,
we'll close the hearing
[2:17] for the uh approval of the intake
application for brew lab 101 brew dock.
[2:25] We do something on this commission
that's a a courtesy to folks. We have
[2:29] public comment. It's not required by
law, but seeking the best
[2:38] two-way discussion and transparency for
commission. We encourage public comment.
[2:44] Uh we have two signed up, the two
mayors. If anybody else has comments, we
[2:49] would entertain those. You have three
minutes to speak. We will be on a timer.
[2:55] We will not answer any of the public
comment because it's not agendaized and
[3:01] the public is not given notice. So if
there's an issue that we'll take up in a
[3:06] later meeting, we will do that. So
Mayor Hok, would you like to approach?
[3:13] Mayor Hedler, please come forward to the
podium.
[3:17] And do we have a microphone there? Okay.
Go ahead and state your name and your
[3:23] affiliation then get after three
minutes.
[3:27] » Good morning.
I serve as the mayor of the city.
[3:31] Thank you commissioners, clerk, and
manager for having me here today. Today
[3:37] I'm here to this morning I'm here to
speak about our group of community
[3:41] municipal leaders aligned around a
shared objective to advance economic
[3:45] development across Sierra County.
Although we don't speak for we are
[3:48] compromised representatives of the
county commission the city of
[3:52] development and city of truth
consequences. While each of us serves
[3:56] our own community we are unified in our
priorities and our commitment to produce
[4:00] coordinated action. Earlier this year we
convene to review current opportunities
[4:06] and we share strong agreement on
advancing initiatives in a coordinated
[4:09] manner in close communication. The
following reflect some of the outcomes
[4:13] of our meetings. We recognize there may
be additional programs, resources or
[4:16] considerations and we welcome your
guidance as we refine and advance this
[4:20] work. Number one is divide the well road
spaceport America access. Our purpose is
[4:25] to improve access to spaceport America
to support regional economic
[4:28] development. The key points include to
reduce commute time and support
[4:32] residential growth for Spaceport America
employees to support plan development
[4:36] including proposed astronaut campground
and to improve public safety through
[4:40] reduced travel distances. The second
initiative is Elute Reservoir
[4:45] conservation minimum pool. We know the
economic vitality of the region is tied
[4:49] to the water levels at El Lake and we
know that water loss during irrigation
[4:53] season impacts wildlife and recreation.
Stable water levels support tourist
[4:58] boating and related businesses.
Visitors contribute to the local
[5:02] spending across multiple sectors and
federal coordination may be required to
[5:06] initiative and that further
clarification is needed regarding water
[5:09] storage authority.
[5:14] We are working on development of an OV
use park development plan. There is a
[5:19] growing demand for all highway vehicle
recreation. We are reviewing federal
[5:23] funding opportunities. There's an
ongoing discussion representative
[5:27] administration,000
[5:31] support and we are in discussion with
state parks regarding the monos
[5:35] campground as a hub for us to access.
Regional initi wastewater infrastructure
[5:42] regionalization. This affects all
entities include consequences
[5:51] from regional planning is underway.
Engineering is in early stages and we
[5:56] are developing a project timeline.
[6:00] At the core of our efforts are job
creation and long-term economic growth.
[6:04] We expect these initiatives will
generate jobs across construction,
[6:07] tourism, hospitality and recreation and
related
[6:11] Thank you.
[6:18] » Good job, Mayor. Thank you.
>> Yes, sir. Thank you. Appreciate it.
[6:23] Mayor, did you wish to speak to us? We
appreciate you being here.
[6:30] I'd like to request unused time
[6:35] [laughter]
[6:37] for the record.
[6:41] New Mexico
members of commission staff. It's our
[6:46] honor to be here today. Um Mayor Her
outline a little bit about some of the
[6:52] projects that we're working. I'd love to
go a little bit more into detail on the
[6:55] people that we're working with on these
projects. We've been meeting regularly
[7:00] to work on ways of collaborating with
the federal county as a whole. Earlier
[7:04] this year, AJ Forte, the executive
director of New Mexico, came to visit
[7:09] with us about the league and their newly
approved infrastructure funding. In the
[7:14] meeting, he commented on the fact that
in his career, he's never seen elected
[7:17] officials in the county come together in
a unified front that urged us to plan
[7:22] and file for larger amounts of
infrastructure funding by filing
[7:26] together. That process is now underway
and we've been given a point of contact
[7:31] with us as needed. We met with Jaro and
members of his staff to discuss some of
[7:37] our frustrations and seek a path forward
for more assistance from Nepal. We were
[7:41] given a point of contact with and are
seeing much more collaboration support
[7:46] for grant writing and other
opportunities. Acting tourism secretary
[7:50] Lancing Adams was invited to Sierra
County where he spent a day with us and
[7:54] our representative appointed officials
for a briefing on tourism and how his
[7:59] department may be able to help.
Secretary Adams was said he has
[8:03] experienced the kind of cooperation that
we are displaying. It's safe to say that
[8:09] his his visit led in part to the tourism
department's decision to invest $50,000
[8:15] as the premier sponsor for the upcoming
New Mexico Open Golf Tournament, which
[8:20] is bringing national attention to Sierra
County. Economic Development Secretary
[8:24] Rob Black spent a day with us and we
elected and appointed officials to
[8:29] discuss opportunities for advancing
tourism outside of lake activities as
[8:33] well as discussion about economic growth
and potential creating public private
[8:37] partnerships to aid moving Sierra County
beyond the reliance solely on lake.
[8:42] These discussions have opened the door
for additional input from the economic
[8:46] development department and opened the
door to a direct line of communication
[8:50] with Secretary Black and members of his
staff. The disaster relief resolutions
[8:55] are another example of this
collaboration.
[8:58] As a result of the county's leadership
in creating and improving their
[9:01] resolution, Eleant was able with the
assistance from state representative
[9:05] Rebecca Da the encouragement of Senator
Brley to expeditiously create our
[9:10] resolution which was approved at our
last city council meeting in record
[9:14] time. The resolution has been forward to
the governor's office for action. We're
[9:19] also working with engineering firms and
state parks to create a future path for
[9:22] expanding the waste water treatment
facility of the deep lake. This may uh
[9:28] the opportunity to bring 400 residents
in TRC and into these expanded
[9:33] facilities and also the ability to
perhaps bring state parks in as well.
[9:38] Again, at both tourism and economic
development departments meeting was
[9:42] pointed out that this collaboration is
something not seen elsewhere in the
[9:45] state and certainly has a new path for
county. Thank you.
[9:50] » Thank you, Mayor.
[laughter]
[9:56] » Okay.
We will go to years of service awards.
[10:03] I'm sorry. We need to consider the
consent agenda. You have the consent
[10:08] agenda ABC. Is there any concerns or
discussion
[10:13] or is there a motion
[10:19] and seconded? All in favor say I. I.
That motion passes.
[10:25] We'll do presentations and years of
service awards. Manager B.
[10:30] » Thank you, Chair Commissioners. We have
two today. Uh the first one out of our
[10:34] sheriff's department is Cassidy Key with
two years of service.
[10:43] » I'm not.
[10:47] » Yes, you do. And also in the sheriff's
department with 17 years of service is
[10:52] Joel Tel.
>> [applause]
[10:59] » Thank you, man. We'll go to department
report. Sheriff, you're you're walking
[11:03] away. Go ahead and come up and tell us
what you got going on.
[11:08] We appreciate you being here.
Commission, chair, commissioners, a
[11:13] little bit to report on. So, last
Thursday and Friday,
[11:17] let's go back. I went to Fort Mexico
County meeting where we laid out
[11:24] legislative priorities and several
issues facing counties throughout the
[11:28] state.
receps
[11:44] is contention
everybody.
[11:54] Went to New Mexico Sheriff's Association
conference this last week.
[11:58] for days
working with some of our federal
[12:02] partners and state partners
[12:07] reference that we did come online with
our program. So we're now data sharing
[12:14] agencies across the state
[12:21] question
[12:27] of directors.
You're a good influence there.
[12:33] Appreciate all you do for sir.
>> Thank you
[12:38] Patrick.
[12:48] Good morning,
[12:52] county manager commissioners.
[12:57] We have fil
[13:01] again
our detention population remains in mid
[13:07] to high 40s which is a good thing.
[13:11] going into the 10our shift schedule
into it but positive
[13:19] with that question.
[13:24] Thank you
Billy Rose.
[13:42] It's been a pretty busy month
[13:47] here. I think
[13:51] we've had several
already
[14:04] had a couple of clubs too.
[14:17] Souths
[14:23] district.
[14:35] Thank you,
>> Ernie.
[15:00] Sorry.
[15:04] Not too much to report on. Um, we
installed some ads at the Albert J Lions
[15:10] and one at the Fair as well. So, there's
two of them out there. Those
[15:16] are good to go. All label real nice,
easy to see, easy places to get to them
[15:22] quick. So
that just keep
[15:27] down there.
[15:33] Just maint
[15:54] the other day. I ran into him about what
our courthouse looks like and I
[16:00] understand there's some issues there. Um
wondering if maybe sometime or another
[16:05] we could take a look at that and see if
we zeroscape it or do something that
[16:11] kind of looks like
this cooperation
[16:16] area
[16:19] but I'll give you some tumble
but that's something that we can look at
[16:26] if there's something we need to find
some money for
[16:31] » commissioner Jones. Um, as part of the
ICIP, we did uh identify the courthouse
[16:36] as one of our priorities and hoping we
can get some state funding on that and
[16:40] part of that could be looking at that
landscaping, whether that's zero scaping
[16:44] or replacing irrigation or whatever we
deem needs to be done there. Yes, sir.
[16:49] » It's kind of on a good intersection.
[16:55] » No, sir.
>> No, sir.
[16:57] » Okay. Thank you, Ryan.
[17:07] Commissioners,
we're wrapping up the fiscal year 27
[17:12] fire protection grant applications that
are due next week. We have five
[17:16] departments putting in
an ide,
[17:26] gallon water storage tank for fire
suppression activities.
[17:30] is for breathing
actually station,000
[17:39] gallon water storage tank and Winston
apparatus truck out of service. Those
[17:48] water storage tanks were really
beneficial. That's the highlight on the
[17:51] grants. booster ISO rating and right now
those stations have minimal water
[17:57] storage
[18:02] kickoff meetings going with our
community wildland protection plan
[18:06] revising that updating it
for it now
[18:12] be a good collaborative effort between a
lot of stakeholders
[18:16] let's see working in coordination
with the CC we had a really good
[18:21] positive meeting
performing some risk assessments for
[18:24] their critical infrastructure systems.
We'll be continuing those meetings and
[18:28] this is going to be a good piece to put
together just to help all departments
[18:32] within the city and as always the
weather
[18:38] isolated. It's very scattered storms,
some precipitation here and there, but
[18:44] unfortunately we're going into a seven
day right here.
[18:48] So any moisture that we got is
pretty quick. Our higher altitude, you
[18:54] know, areas within the Gila provide,
we're still under significant, you know,
[18:59] moisture, thunder, and rain,
precipitation. So, hopefully that
[19:03] percolates down here, but we won't be
getting overhead moisture. So, get ready
[19:07] for another seven days, 100°.
[19:17] I wish the matrix looked different, but
it's just
[19:21] As much as we've sat on our front porch
and watched it rain on mountain, it
[19:25] ought to be green.
>> Yeah. Yeah. It's also had repeated
[19:31] lightning strike. So maybe it's not.
>> And it's very isolated this year. I mean
[19:35] like Kingston gets a good amount.
Winston great amount you know like you
[19:41] come off Winston like
[19:47] so
[19:59] » can we shoot our fireworks?
>> No sir.
[20:02] » So I get a lot of questions about this
lately right we're getting a little rain
[20:06] so people think it's going to the window
to lift the resend the burn
[20:10] restrictions. The state still has the
statewide burn restrictions and I know
[20:15] that encapsulated
any burns any control burns anything
[20:21] like that state has acted. So even if
the county you know this state
[20:31] in contact
management officer weekly when are we
[20:35] looking at this they don't have any
>> you drop my name on that they help you
[20:45] » I don't think any name
it's all atmospheric conditions and
[20:49] indices so
Anything else?
[20:54] » Thank you, Ryan.
>> Thank you,
[20:56] » Keith.
[21:11] Commissioners
[21:16] address
[21:26] questions.
[21:30] Manager
[21:38] Nate, are you ready?
Come on up. Visions for Sierra County.
[21:43] Nate Stevens.
[21:47] Appreciate your your work and your
compilation of data. sharing that with
[21:52] us. So, we're ready to hear from you.
>> Yes, sir. Okay. Uh, commissioners, thank
[21:57] you for giving me a few minutes today. I
want to introduce an opportunity that I
[22:01] believe Sierra County needs to
understand. An opportunity centered on
[22:04] the open market. I'm not here today to
tell you that we have all the answers.
[22:08] I'm not asking you to approve a
geothermal plant, a water project, a
[22:12] mine, a data center, or any other
specific development.
[22:16] I'm asking something much more basic. Do
we understand
[22:20] well enough to recognize an opportunity
if it is there and to know what needs to
[22:24] be protected before we make decisions?
The more I have researched that
[22:28] question, the more convinced I have
become that the answer today is no. But
[22:32] I have also become convinced that we
already know enough to justify finding
[22:36] out. The Hornado Del is a huge north
south base and it crosses Sierra and Don
[22:43] counties and extends for roughly 160
miles. Much of the Sierra County portion
[22:48] populated and for generations we have
largely viewed that landscape in terms
[22:52] of ranching, open land, transportation,
military and space activity. But beneath
[22:57] that landscape may be a combination of
resources that we have never assembled
[23:01] in one economic picture. The New Mexico
Bureau of Geology has already documented
[23:06] two groundwater systems in the central a
shallow perch system and a deeper
[23:10] regional offer system. The research
describes ground water moving through
[23:14] deep flow paths including a rechar
recharge originating in the surrounding
[23:19] mountains. The bureau's broader brackish
water assessment also tells us something
[23:23] equally important. The water quality
record is incomplete across the horado.
[23:28] That assessment contains 173 water
quality data points. The reported
[23:33] dissolved solid concentration is about
1,354 mg per liter. Those observations
[23:39] are unevenly distributed and heavily
concentrated toward the southern end of
[23:42] the basin. The deepest well identified
in that assessment reaches 6,44 ft. Yet
[23:47] the report says very little chemistry is
available for that whale. The deepest
[23:52] well with a reported TDS measurement is
only 1,321 ft and it is near the
[23:57] southern end of the basin. So the
science does not allow me to stand here
[24:01] and tell you that Sierra County has a
proven industrial brackish water supply
[24:04] at depth. What it does allow me to say
is this. A deeper regional groundwater
[24:09] system is documented. Mineralized and
practiced groundwater is documented in
[24:12] the broader and some of the questions
most important to Sierra County have
[24:17] simply not been answered with enough
sight specific data. That is where the
[24:21] economic opportunity becomes
interesting. For years, resources like
[24:25] energy, water, minerals, land and
industry have generally been discussed
[24:29] as separate projects. I think we should
ask whether they can support one
[24:32] another. I call this the energy, water,
mineral industrial loop. The concept is
[24:37] straightforward. If commercially useful
geothermal energy can be proven in an
[24:41] appropriate part of the Hornata, it
could provide reliable around the clock
[24:45] clean power. If an appropriate deep
non-fresh water source can also be
[24:49] proven it potentially provide industrial
water without making our valuable fresh
[24:53] water supplies the foundation of
industrial growth. If geothermal or
[24:58] produced fluids contain minerals at
commercially meaningful concentrations,
[25:02] those minerals can be evaluated as
another potential resource, but only if
[25:06] chemistry proves they are there.
Reliable energy and an appropriate
[25:10] industrial water strategy can help
attract private industry. Private
[25:14] industry creates customers for energy.
Investment in infrastructure, jobs and
[25:18] tax base. And each piece becomes viable
to make the next piece easier to
[25:24] develop. That is the loop. Government
can help us understand these resources.
[25:28] State and federal programs can provide
research, expertise, data, and
[25:33] potentially funding. But government is
not the economic engine I am proposing.
[25:37] Private investment is the purpose of
understanding the hornado is to put
[25:40] Sierra County in a position to attract
responsible private investment if the
[25:45] resources and economics justify it. And
I want to be equally clear about the
[25:49] other side of that responsibility.
Before we determine where development
[25:52] could occur, we need to know where it
should not occur. Responsible resource
[25:56] strategy identifies freshwater
resources, ranching interests, cultural
[26:00] and archeological resources,
environmental constraints, military
[26:04] considerations, existing infrastructure,
private property, and other areas that
[26:08] need protection. Finding opportunity and
finding out what to protect are not
[26:12] competing missions. They are part of the
same job. The problem I have encountered
[26:17] while doing this research is that the
complete picture does not exist in one
[26:20] place. pieces that are held by the New
Mexico Bureau of Geology, other pieces
[26:25] in state engineering records, USGS
studies, BLM information, university
[26:30] research, historical reports, utility
information, land records, and private
[26:34] industry. Some studies are decades old.
Some cross the Sierra County line. Some
[26:40] observations are measured, others are
modeled. And some of the data simply, we
[26:45] need simply have not been collected at
the deaths and locations that matter the
[26:48] most to this question. No single
commissioner or county employee should
[26:52] be expected to assemble that picture
alone. That is why I'm asking this
[26:57] commission to establish a s county
resource working group. It job should
[27:01] not be to promote a predetermined
project. It should not be created to
[27:05] stop development before we understand
it. His job should be to bring the
[27:09] science agencies, land interest,
utilities, community interest, the
[27:12] private sector into one disciplined
process focused on.
[27:18] Assemble what has already been studied.
Determine what those studies actually
[27:22] prove. Identify what remains unknown.
Map the resources and the constraints
[27:26] together. Determine what needs
protection. Identify the questions worth
[27:30] spending money to answer. And begin
talking with the private companies and
[27:33] public agencies that may have a role in
what comes next. I that we organize the
[27:38] group within 30 days and give it an
initial 90-day working program. That is
[27:42] enough time to begin assembling the
evidence and relationships without
[27:45] turning this into an endless study. And
if those relationships begin producing
[27:49] opportunities, we should preserve the
institutional knowledge and maintain
[27:53] important contact afterwards because if
Sierra County spends months opening
[27:56] doors, someone needs to be here when the
opportunity calls back. Commissioners,
[28:00] there may be an opportunity in the
Hornado del Mera that Sierra County has
[28:04] never assembled into one picture. Energy
water, minerals, land, infrastructure,
[28:09] industry. Individually, none of those
guarantees economic trust trans
[28:13] transformation. But if the evidence
shows that they overlap in the right
[28:16] place, in the right way, and at
commercially competitive cost, they
[28:20] could begin supporting one another.
Maybe the research tells us that only
[28:23] part of the loop works, then we pursue
that part. Maybe it identifies areas
[28:27] that should not be developed. If we
protect them, maybe it tells us the
[28:31] entire concept is uneconomical. If that
is what the evidence says, we need to
[28:35] know that There is another possibility.
The Hornado may contain a combination of
[28:40] resources and location advantages
capable of attracting private investment
[28:44] on a scale Sierra County has not
previously considered. If that
[28:47] opportunity exists, I do not want Sierra
County discovering it after someone else
[28:51] does. I'm not asking you today decide
the future of the Bernado Del. I'm
[28:56] asking you make sure that when that
those decisions come, Sierra County
[28:59] understands enough to make them for
itself. Let's determine what we have,
[29:04] what we need to protect, what is
commercially possible, and then let the
[29:07] evidence, not fear and speculation, tell
us what comes next. The opportunity may
[29:12] be beneath our feet, the responsibility
to understand it is ours. I'm asking
[29:16] this commission to establish the Sier
County resource working group and let us
[29:20] do the work. Thanks.
>> Thank you, Nate. Any questions,
[29:26] gentlemen, for coming?
>> Thank you. Did you say who you were
[29:30] representing?
private citiz.
[29:32] » Okay. I didn't know if you would.
>> No. Basically, uh what's happening right
[29:37] now is we have realized that El cannot
sustain our county by itself. And we
[29:42] have a portion of our community that is
that is against any kind of development.
[29:47] What I'm proposing is that we do
development correctly. So, I'm a New
[29:52] Mexico native. I've been in New Mexico
my whole life. I understand community. I
[29:56] understand New Mexico. But right now,
technology that previously wasn't
[30:02] available. So we passed the moratorium
on data centers when we didn't
[30:07] understand what we had. If a geothermal
company provides the energy and another
[30:12] company cleans the water, the only thing
that a data center emits is humid air.
[30:17] So we did a moratorum and I think that
that was the right move because it gives
[30:21] us 18 months to learn and to study but
we need to use those 18 months. We can't
[30:27] sit on our hands and not do anything for
the next drought, the next thing that
[30:32] comes along. We're in trouble. And you
know, it's got me worried. I'm standing
[30:36] here today because no one else is.
That's the only reason I'm standing
[30:40] here. So, if someone else has done this
idea, I'd be happy to be fishing right
[30:44] now.
That's pretty much what I have for you.
[30:50] » Anything else? Nate, really appreciate
you putting this stuff together,
[30:55] bringing The commission will take your
request and revis.
[30:59] » Yes, sir. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[31:02] Okay. Now, man, Sier County GRT and
>> we're going to employ new technology
[31:09] here. So yeah, it's probably
[31:34] » [snorts]
[31:48] » Thank you, Monica.
[snorts]
[31:52] » Okay,
[31:55] commissioners. Thank you so much. Today
I'm going to present some information
[31:59] that's been requested regarding Sierra
County's economic status and tourism
[32:03] indicators.
So first I want to go through what data
[32:07] I collected. So the first thing I went
through was the total GRT that is
[32:11] provided by New Mexico Tax and Rev. An
important note about this is it is two
[32:15] months behind. I just got June's data
yesterday and I incorporated in that. So
[32:20] it'll be interesting to see what July's
data says. I also broke it down by
[32:24] industry that is also listed on New
Mexico tax and rev on the spreadsheets
[32:28] they provide. Also thankful thankful to
all the other entities who provided me
[32:33] lodgers tax. I use that in this
presentation as well. And then I also
[32:36] used the reservoir data for elephant but
some of the percentage full. I also
[32:41] looked at labor and visitation
statistics which came from the bureau of
[32:45] labor statistics as well as local news
sources and counts from state parks that
[32:49] have been publicized.
[32:54] So the first one here is just a graph of
over the last couple years from 2023 to
[32:59] 2026 of the lake levels. So 2023 you can
see it's in blue. It starts under 15
[33:08] starts under sorry
[33:11] starts under 15% goes up to about 30 and
then goes back down. As you can tell
[33:16] over the years it has continually
dropped every year. We haven't quite
[33:20] made it back up to that.
>> [clears throat]
[33:23] » Next one is elephant but nature holiday
visitation. So if you look at Memorial
[33:27] Day in 2025 there was approximately
60,000 visitors to the lake and in 2026
[33:33] approximately 35,000. That's a decrease
of about 42%. On 4th of July in 2024 we
[33:40] had approximately 110,000 people visit
and in 2026 it was reported 82,000
[33:47] people. Some other statistics there is
Labor Day in 2023 we had about 26,000
[33:52] Junth last Father's Day in 2026 we had
42,000 and then again that number from
[33:57] 4th of July.
Next what I looked at was a regional
[34:02] total [clears throat] GRT by entity
entity. This is apples to apples
[34:06] comparisons. This is just January
through June which was the data I had
[34:11] and I wanted to show over that same time
period what was happening in each of the
[34:15] entities GRT. So if you look at Sierra
County, we have been pretty stable over
[34:20] the last couple years. It was up in
2023, down a little in 2024, up in 25,
[34:26] and about the same in 26. Truth of
consequences, kind of the same story.
[34:30] Up, down, up, and up. Elephant but they
had a low year in 23 and pretty steady
[34:36] years in 24 and 25, and in 26 it's gone
down. Williamsburg has continually gone
[34:41] down since 2023.
So just to give an idea the pool, this
[34:47] is Sierra County, the unincorporated
area of Sierra County, January through
[34:50] June for 2026. Just showing the
different industries. So if you look
[34:54] there, construction is the big one in
blue. It's about $99,000 since January.
[35:00] And if you notice, there is a lot of
different categories. The two big ones
[35:04] are construction and retail trade.
Construction is not tourism driven. A
[35:09] lot of these are not. So what I did next
was I went ahead and pulled out the
[35:14] industries that are tourist sensitive
GRTs. So accommodations and food which
[35:19] includes hotels, motel, ins and lodging,
restaurants and food service, fast food,
[35:24] coffee shops and bars. Uh arts,
entertainment and recreation which is
[35:28] marinas and recreational businesses,
sports and recreation facilities,
[35:32] attraction and entertainment. And then
retail trade which grocery and
[35:36] convenience stores, sporting recreation
related retail, general merchandise and
[35:40] other stores. This is tourism sensitive
but not tourism specific because
[35:44] obviously the folks who live here also
shop
[35:49] here right is the I broke each down by
the tourism sensitive GRT
[35:53] year-over-year. If you look at Sierra
County, you can see those items. This is
[35:58] the unincorporated areas has gone up
consistently since 2023. When you turn
[36:04] around and look at TC, it has had the
opposite. It has gone down since 2023.
[36:14] Next, looking at Elephant View, you can
see 2023 was about 164,000. It went up
[36:20] to 190, went up to 202, and then now
back down in 2026 to 182,000.
[36:26] Williamsburg low in 23, then up up, and
then back down a little bit in 2026.
[36:37] The next set of data is the watchers tax
data over from 2023 to 2026 for each of
[36:43] those entities as well. If you look at
Sierra County, we were high in 2024 or
[36:48] 2023, sorry, down 2024, up and up again
in 25 and 26. TC low in 23 pretty high
[36:57] in 24 and then down in 25 and down even
lower in 26 which is about a 14%
[37:03] decrease from 24 to 26. Elephant but
theirs is was up in 23 really high in 24
[37:11] down in 25 level at 26 but if you look
at 24 to 26 that's a 60% decrease.
[37:19] uh Williamsburg,
low in 23, high in 24, high in 25, and
[37:24] low in 26.
[37:30] So, the next piece of data I pulled was
the Sierra County labor market. So,
[37:34] looking at this, this shows you the
labor force and who's employed. So,
[37:38] labor force right now is 4,237
people. We have 3,982
[37:44] people employed. That leaves 255 people
unemployed at this moment. That's a 6%
[37:50] 6% unemployment. Uh the labor force has
increased from January till June by 17
[37:57] people and then is the employed has
increased by 67. That a decrease of
[38:02] unemployed by 50. So that is a change of
7.2% unemployment rate to a 6%
[38:08] unemployment rate.
So what this data shows me overall
[38:13] government GRT remains relatively
strong. It's supported in part by the
[38:17] construction. Even while some visitor
sensitive indicators show some weakness,
[38:21] the construction has been making up for
that. Construction has been up
[38:24] year-over-year. Lodgers tax shows the
clearest weakness. January through June
[38:29] 26 is at 14.7% below 2024 in tier C and
60%.4 60.4% % below in 2024 in Elute.
[38:38] Tourism sensitive GRT is mixed by entity
and industry. Broad retail trade is an
[38:43] indicator of visitor activity, not
tourism only. And labor condition
[38:47] weakened early in 2026, but is improved
by June. Reservoir levels provide an
[38:53] important context, but these indicators
don't necessarily establish a causation.
[38:58] I think with the month of July getting
that data in there it's really going to
[39:01] show a bigger picture because we have
seen over this year a decline in those
[39:05] tourism sensitive GRTs with that I'll
stand
[39:18] too
[39:22] you're an analytical sort and that that
helps us get a picture of what's
[39:26] happening
[39:37] Um, Amber, I see on here we kind of look
at
[39:45] 2023 to 2026.
When we compared
[39:51] like tax and GRT
tax, we looked at
[39:57] the comparison between 2024 and 2026.
Was was that a 2024 a better year than
[40:06] 23 and 25?
>> Yes. And a lot of these 2024 2023 is
[40:13] good in Rogers tax in Sierra County, but
it went down. It's gone down since then.
[40:20] So I I I just went with three years of
data because I had a short amount of
[40:24] time to do my own.
>> Okay.
[40:27] Um, and the other question I had was
[40:33] when I look at all these numbers,
they're January through June. We look at
[40:38] tourism numbers, logers tax. I know you
do have some year stuff on tax, but um,
[40:47] what what happens when you go
July 1 through December 31? What happens
[40:55] then?
I mean, is that not is am I incorrect in
[40:59] my thought that that's not included?
>> That is not included in there. I did an
[41:03] apples to apples comparison for those
months to include the full year data and
[41:08] the other would skew the differences
amongst the different
[41:13] » couldn't be I couldn't compare. I'd have
to do a month-to-month comparison for
[41:17] that. And that's what I did here. it was
just combined January through July or
[41:21] June because that was the data that was
consistent amongst all of those years.
[41:25] » And I understand that that would be the
case to look at 26. That makes sense.
[41:31] But what would been helpful for me is to
have those July 1 through January one
[41:37] for the previous years.
>> Sir, I have that information available.
[41:40] I can email it to you if you'd like.
>> That'd be great. Yeah, because I I don't
[41:43] know how that spines, you know, really
our tourism.
[41:47] This is
But uh it seems to me like we hit
[41:52] Memorial Day which is first part of
June, right? And then our big attendance
[41:59] rolls through
about Labor Day. Labor Day falls off
[42:04] every year and uh or at least in my
opinion and and that stuff that isn't in
[42:10] here. So it's it's hard to get that data
through to date.
[42:15] Um and I had one other question. had a
conversation with the mayor of
[42:20] Williamsburg.
Um, and I thought she told me
[42:26] that their gross receipts was the
highest it ever been.
[42:31] » In May of this year, the GRT that
represented May was the highest we had
[42:35] ever seen. It was the highest that
Williamsburg had ever seen. It has since
[42:39] dropped. I have the figure here with the
new June numbers. The new June was 25%
[42:44] less.
[42:47] Wonder why that other
>> in May. The the big indicator with the
[42:53] May business activity was construction
jumped considerably.
[42:59] » It has now since gone back down.
[43:04] And then I have one other question and
I'm not trying to question your
[43:12] I attended some ongoing meetings with
with state parks on sewer plant stuff
[43:20] and
they represented us that the attendance
[43:26] in 25 was
was up from 24. Is that is that what you
[43:32] reflect or I mean I know we picked the
holidays out but does how does that
[43:38] reflect with total attendance?
>> So I just I did not get this information
[43:44] from the state parks. I do have an email
that I'm sending to them to get their
[43:48] official records to update this to have
a little more depth in the visitor
[43:52] percentage. These were just what was
available online.
[43:56] » Okay. Yeah. Because that was one of my
questions to him as we look through
[44:00] through the attendance and how we were
working on another issue and we were
[44:05] concerned then about attendance and how
it was going to affect all the sewer
[44:09] stuff
and and that was their response which
[44:14] was quite a surprise to me.
[44:19] » Yes sir. Some other data that I would
like that I'm planning on pulling and
[44:22] putting in the presentation in the
future would be business licenses as
[44:26] well to see year over year there have
been increases and decreases in what's
[44:30] been going on with business licenses.
[44:43] » So
[44:47] tell me what you think about
Honestly,
[44:51] » what's this data showing you?
>> Right now, this data is showing me I
[44:54] don't have enough data to make an
opinion. I would really need July
[44:57] through September. I think that's going
to be the biggest indicator of what the
[45:01] lake levels and the tourism has been
going through. Unfortunately, because
[45:05] the data is well September obviously
hasn't happened yet and it's a couple
[45:09] months behind. It is going to take some
time to actually see that the the data
[45:14] comes out for two months behind on the
15th of every month.
[45:18] » So, future is either un it could be
bright or unsure.
[45:21] » Correct. I mean, just looking at the GRT
between May and June with a 25% decrease
[45:27] is kind of concerning even though May
was one of our highest months ever. It
[45:31] it does concern me a little bit. It
needs to be monitored.
[45:35] » And I said the other day, you know,
we've had some hotel shut down on Rogers
[45:39] tax obviously have their shut down
the elephant's been down.
[45:49] And so we're seeing some of that. And
then the other thing that that I think
[45:54] is maybe raised some concerns with
[46:01] and I'm not
mad at me, but I don't know how well
[46:06] we're tracking
how that's affecting I know that's
[46:11] certainly an issue.
starting to track somewhere.
[46:20] Is that a trend you think that's the
>> I think I mean speaking anecdotally for
[46:26] people who I know who have Airbnbs who
are used to having them booked solid
[46:30] from June, July and August. I know a
couple who only have one booking in
[46:34] August and one in July. That's just
anecdotal. I don't have any facts on
[46:39] that.
[46:43] Thank you. Well, I think it's a start
and it's really a a good comparison and
[46:48] a good kind of a
a bell weather to indicate what we can
[46:53] expect in the future. So, thank you for
putting this together and just an
[46:57] excellent report. We'll look for an
update maybe October, November.
[47:02] » Yes, sir. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you.
[47:11] Okay, we'll go on to the board of
finance July 2026
[47:15] reconciliation
[47:19] packet
answer questions
[47:24] not [snorts]
[47:30] » Mr. I move to approve July
[47:35] there. Second
move and second. All in favor say.
[47:43] » We have uh
in our old business theou between Sierra
[47:48] County and the city of truth or
consequences regarding coordination of
[47:52] development along shared boundaries.
City Manager Gary Whitehead, we
[47:59] appreciate you being here. Thank you for
taking time out of your schedule and uh
[48:04] helping us with this. So, if you would
uh you want to update us on the the
[48:09] coordination in the meetings,
[48:15] so again, good to be here. I apologize
for not thinking or being aware to be
[48:20] here today was going to come, but I'm
glad to be here.
[48:24] You know, we've been doing together and
I do um as I try to do things within the
[48:30] city, I think partnerships are the right
decision and us, you know, working
[48:33] together. I I really applaud Amber on
that last report. I'd like to spend some
[48:37] more time with her and put our data
together. I would concur with her
[48:40] findings and the trends, right? And
unfortunately, I take a look at what the
[48:45] city's doing in gross receipt tax and
concur that's up our tax has definitely
[48:50] been trending down the entire year. So,
I don't know that it's necessary. I can
[48:54] go back
It's an anomaly of we're not catching or
[48:58] not seeing all those that are
participating. That would be a small
[49:02] picture, right? It's just trended lower
which would tell me, you know, less
[49:06] people are coming to stay in those
facilities. And we've taken that
[49:09] serious. we purchased a software pack
because it will help us make sure that
[49:12] we can collect data for those that are
participating in both in all the vendors
[49:17] that that offer that service that we can
collect those and make sure that we're
[49:21] charging fairly across the board to make
sure that we're so we'll continue to
[49:25] work but I do look forward to great
report as it relates to the uh the
[49:30] memorandum of understanding
what came to our attention a few months
[49:36] back as the loves came online and became
aware that particular part of our
[49:41] community is becoming attractive to
other vendors, right? I know we know the
[49:45] big box retailers tend to follow each
other, right? CVS is next to Walgreens,
[49:49] right? Walmarts and Targets and Home
Depot and Lowe's tend to follow. And I
[49:54] think we're seeing a similar situation
where where the Loves has, you know,
[49:58] competitors that would look at their
model and decide whether they wanted to
[50:01] come to town. The city of Truth and
Consequences did receive inquiries from
[50:04] another particular potential outside
that wanted move to the area and it
[50:10] became clear to us that that particular
area is kind of has that end of our
[50:15] boundary. Our our municipality ends
there and the county's jurisdiction
[50:18] falls into place right next to that. So,
it became clear that we needed to make
[50:23] sure we had some uh idea or
understanding of how we could partner to
[50:28] make sure that any potential similar
business in that area would have to
[50:32] follow or be at least aware of some of
the similar conditions that the current
[50:37] provider I'll use.
We made them go through several steps.
[50:40] There's several rules within our um our
ordinances that they had to follow and
[50:45] we felt like a vendor coming in across
the street from them may not have the
[50:49] same obligations. So that's how we ended
up starting on this mission to ask the
[50:53] county if they would enter at least anou
with us. In our discussions uh we did
[50:59] discuss briefly the extr territorial
zone. Right. There is statutes that
[51:03] require an ETZ. Um, both your county
attorney and our attorney felt like this
[51:08] particular issue was not to get into the
the meat and the potatoes of the law and
[51:13] try to find the nuances that we could.
We wanted to respect each other's given
[51:17] authority within the law. And so any of
those conditions that would exist under
[51:21] the extr territorial zone would play
themselves out as they did. This
[51:25] document before you is simply a way to
say if if a potential customer comes to
[51:31] you and that they wanted to develop a
land that was connected to our boundary
[51:35] that sits adjacent to where our
infrastructure was. If they were asking
[51:41] you to potentially say, "How can we hook
up to the city's infrastructure?"
[51:46] Your position would be at least you need
you're going to have to work with the
[51:49] city of truth for consequences and you
may be required to comply with their
[51:53] zoning regulations to do so. And so that
was the I think the foundation that we
[51:59] finally stood on when we developed the
Your attorney certainly brought some,
[52:04] you know, some protections for the
county on that was the one piece within
[52:07] theou that we felt was significant to
say the one piece that we would have
[52:12] would be if one of the vendors wanted to
attach to city utility infrastructure
[52:16] that they would have to follow the same
rules. But I'll share with you um with
[52:21] the Loves, we use several pieces of our
tool box to help loves come to town. We
[52:26] used the Lita statute within our
ordinance to create a condition that we
[52:30] could provide them some economic
development based on jobs. Um we
[52:35] required that loves put in the the sewer
transmission line that connected to our
[52:40] line of copper. Loves was required to
put in and improve the water line from
[52:44] the tanks underneath the road they were
going to build. We all said that that
[52:48] was the leadup and then they and they
had to pay for the extension of the
[52:53] electric line so that they could get
significant the sufficient power that
[52:56] they needed. So, we use the tools, we
charge them, and we want to be able to
[53:00] do that same thing with a potential
vendor that's going to come next to us.
[53:04] So, with that, Mr. Chairman, members of
the commission, I would stand for
[53:08] questions and continue the dialogue.
Before we go to questions, attorney, did
[53:13] you have anything to add?
>> Mr. Chairman, I think uh Mr. White did a
[53:17] great job explaining this. Certainly we
had concerns when we received the
[53:20] original from the city and we went
through and highlighted those concerns
[53:24] in red line format. We sat down for a
meeting with the city and negotiated
[53:28] that out. Um and through those changes
we preserve the county's um regulatory
[53:32] authority over areas within its
jurisdiction. Um specifically in section
[53:37] one we incorporate provision that said
that nothing inou alters, expands,
[53:40] diminishes or otherwise affects the
statuto or regulatory authority of
[53:43] either party. We included a provision in
section three which provides that any
[53:47] city comments on county development
applications are advisory only and not
[53:50] binding on the county and further
preserves the county's authority over
[53:53] applications from the jurisdiction. Um
section four expressly states that
[53:57] nothing inou transfers zoning authority
from the governing jurisdiction. Uh and
[54:01] then the later provides that doesn't
delegate or transfer any statuto
[54:05] authority or restrict either party's
police powers. section 9 or 11
[54:09] specifically pervert preserve to each
party's independent legislative
[54:13] regulatory peritting zoning utility
police car or other governmental
[54:16] authority. What we understood this to do
was if someone or a developer would want
[54:20] something from the city that they're
going to have to comply with the city's
[54:23] um zoning ordinances and other
regulations and requirements in order to
[54:26] be able to get those utilities. So it
doesn't it makes it clear in section
[54:31] three that it's permissive that we may
submit that application over to the
[54:34] city. Does not require that we do so.
This is just a to cooperate um with the
[54:38] city to ensure the development um
doesn't catch them off guard and that
[54:44] developers comply with their
requirements before they move forward
[54:46] with their developments.
[54:50] » I I just want to make a comment. U we
have two of the three mayors involved
[54:55] sitting with us today.
We are in such a good place when it
[55:00] comes to cooperation and coordination
and that includes the mayor of
[55:05] Williamsburg.
Uh everything that we do is trying to
[55:10] provide
better environment, economic opportunity
[55:14] for our citizens, the ability to keep
our kids home
[55:20] when they graduate high school and give
them opportunities and and keep them
[55:25] close if they choose to be. But the the
atmosphere of cooperation
[55:31] is is in thisou.
The city is within authorities. The
[55:37] county is within their authorities.
We would take an application and if they
[55:42] want to hook up to uh city
infrastructure and utilities, they're
[55:47] going to need to negotiate with the
city. We're not going to do that for
[55:50] them. It's not our place.
But we would encourage
[55:56] uh development outside of the limits of
any of the three communities that that
[56:03] we have and seek to make that the least
cumbersome that we can and still provide
[56:10] for
protection
[56:14] uh a good environment and coordination
with the city. So I think this is an
[56:19] outstanding document. I'm really glad we
this because it gave the city manager
[56:25] and the county manager uh time to work
out some things and the two attorneys
[56:30] contributed significantly to this. So,
thank you Amber and Gary and all those
[56:36] involved.
Gentlemen, do you have questions or
[56:39] comments?
>> No, I just like to comment on Attorney
[57:02] That's an inside joke between me and my
new um Dave
[57:07] on the legal side of this. What?
[57:13] As I read through here, it says
nonbinding. Nonbinding doesn't change
[57:17] anything.
Why not just a simple paragraph
[57:24] that says, "Hey guys, we're going to
play well in the sandbox together and
[57:29] and it's okay." Why? Why? I mean, we put
a lot of words in here that if you read
[57:35] through, it doesn't do anything.
>> Mr. Chairman, Mr. Jones, that's not what
[57:40] the city proposed. City proposed a eight
page
[57:44] or a six page and I went through it and
and addressed those those concerns that
[57:48] I had out of each section. So, yes,
you're reading what they had and then we
[57:52] kind of adjusted that to address my
concerns or the county's concerns.
[57:58] » Uh so Gary and these are out of total
respect. I sure I think you know how
[58:04] much I appreciate what you're doing with
the city. So um but let's just go back
[58:09] to the utilities issue.
What what utilities let's say I'm I want
[58:15] to build a Taj Mahal next to the county
next to the city. property. What
[58:21] utilities can you extend?
>> Mr. Chairman, Mr. Jones, so again, if
[58:28] you're connected directly to our
boundary in most areas, you have some
[58:32] weaknesses when you when you go north
and I'm talking about this area I'm
[58:37] talking about. We could extend
everything to water, waste water, sewer,
[58:41] trash,
we could provide you all
[58:48] in that.
>> Okay. So I'm going to I'm going to ask
[58:50] you this question. What statuto
authority do you have to expand service
[58:56] outside your service?
>> I could not answer that.
[59:00] » I can't I would expect that as the
chairman of PRC clearly ask me and I
[59:05] would ask you that question if I
>> you don't electric certificate for
[59:10] convenience to service that area.
>> So that's one thing that I find that
[59:15] might be a little bit confusing.
might look out and
[59:22] I knew that was a question that I had
and we just kept talking about this. So
[59:27] that I have a little bit of concern.
what uh what business could come to you
[59:33] whether located in the city or someone
outside of the city and let's go to
[59:38] water and sewer because I happen to
think
[59:42] I could be wrong pretending to be legal
here but I I happen to think that you
[59:46] can extend water and sewer outside of
your boundary to accommodate
[59:53] but any business that wants to locate in
within
[59:59] municipal boundaries, city boundaries or
outside.
[1:00:04] What services would you provide to them
for free
[1:00:08] as far as infrastructure?
Would you not be obligated to would the
[1:00:14] developer not be obligated to to
pay for the up and downream cost to the
[1:00:21] system?
>> I would say under the guise of the
[1:00:27] service. Yes, they would be required to
pay. So again, if I charge charge 14.2
[1:00:34] using electric as an example, but water
my water rates, I would charge that
[1:00:38] customer for the water rates. But at the
same time, my ordinance don't extend. I
[1:00:44] can't charge that particular vendor or
outside business for the um fees that we
[1:00:50] would have for for connecting to the
system. Right? So we charge impact fees
[1:00:54] in the city to any business that's
inside the city. So I wouldn't have a
[1:00:58] mechanism by which I can charge provided
that the extr territorial zone within
[1:01:03] statute doesn't provide that. Right? So
that's again a condition that I may have
[1:01:07] to go look at and deter.
>> So let's say that somebody wanted to
[1:01:11] build a hotel across the river where you
have no city utilities there and they
[1:01:18] wanted city water. Would you extend that
to them or would they have to pay for
[1:01:23] the aids to construction to have those
extensions made? I would assume that I
[1:01:27] would negotiate with that particular
business for a contract that would
[1:01:31] require that they input the
infrastructure to connect to our closest
[1:01:34] point of connection that we could
provide them. I did not assume that I
[1:01:38] was that I would have an obligation to
provide them just because they're
[1:01:42] » right and that and that's kind of
utility regulation 101 you don't affect
[1:01:47] the customer base somebody new coming
along you get the upstream and
[1:01:52] downstream cost so I appreciate that but
in this change any of that. I mean, it's
[1:01:58] just it's simple as if I'm a developer,
I know I got to come to the city and he
[1:02:04] who has the gold make the rules. So, I
would have to comply with whatever you
[1:02:09] wanted me to comply with
in order to hook up. Correct.
[1:02:14] » Mr. Chair and Mr. Jones, technically,
but you wouldn't have to comply with my
[1:02:17] sign ordinances, my road ordinances, my
animal control. that particular business
[1:02:22] because it falls within the jurisdiction
of the county would be subject to your
[1:02:27] regulations and rules. And so if that
particular business chose to say we're
[1:02:31] going to put in our own infrastructure,
we're going to drill our own well. We
[1:02:35] choose to partner with CR Electric Co-op
versus partner with the city. We'll
[1:02:38] build everything in the county. Then I
would have no authority other than to go
[1:02:43] to the ETZ statute within law and
determine how would I make that
[1:02:48] particular business comply. Right? So
that would be the only potential
[1:02:52] opportunity I would have to to bring
that business comp.
[1:02:56] » So So you brought up some good examples
of zoning, animal control, all of those
[1:03:00] other things. Is that spot zoning?
>> Mr. Chairman, uh Mr. Jones, I'm not in
[1:03:05] the spot that I could answer that
question. I would assume not spot
[1:03:08] zoning, but again, if I was going to
make you as a business owner comply with
[1:03:13] all of mine, that potentially could be
some form of spot and and spot zoning
[1:03:17] has a different conotation and
complies with spots, right? It has some
[1:03:24] but I'm not prepared to debate that.
>> I I know and and Gary, I
[1:03:31] again I have so much respect for you and
I remember a day at a meeting in Sierra
[1:03:36] County when we brought up zoning.
>> Does that ring a bell? Yes, sir.
[1:03:41] » So, and I and I guess whenever we
mention zoning in any of this, I'm going
[1:03:45] to have to ask our commissioners,
are we for zoning of
[1:03:51] and how does that fit with our
constituency. So that I'm going to tell
[1:03:55] you that is a concern. If it's a matter
of kicking in the ET, then we all get
[1:04:00] together
and go along with that because as I read
[1:04:05] this,
with all due respect, we can you can
[1:04:09] come in and say if you're going to hook
up to my water, you're going to you're
[1:04:12] going to have you're not going to exceed
the height of your steeple.
[1:04:18] 30 some
black I think probably love's got a
[1:04:22] variance on your stuff because that I
can see that sign from my house which is
[1:04:27] okay I don't but if we say hey we don't
want that to be 30 ft high we have
[1:04:33] nothing we can say if they hook up to
your wall it's your your decision you're
[1:04:39] going to decide whether or not they can
build a steeple 30 ft high or not and it
[1:04:44] takes a little bit of authority away
from from the county
[1:04:48] And I think I made my very clear on
everything I say. Taking and removing
[1:04:55] our authority from the county in my
books is not healthy to the
[1:05:01] constituency.
[1:05:05] And I should have just pontificated on
that. I got that the word zoning was
[1:05:11] mentioned in here in a couple of places.
One, it said wouldn't wouldn't apply at
[1:05:15] all. And then we go to the next page and
mentioned a couple of times.
[1:05:21] So that that's a concern.
Um
[1:05:28] I don't need to belabor a bunch of it. I
I I just have a lot of concerns about
[1:05:36] about making it into a formal agreement
that in my view doesn't do anything
[1:05:42] other than maybe create a possibility
for spots only outside.
[1:05:50] And then there's one other thing and I
keep and I'll bring this up again. We
[1:05:55] talk about cooperation between element
view county and Williamsburg.
[1:06:01] We it doesn't seem like we ever mention
Williamsburg anymore. I I don't know
[1:06:06] that Williamsburg has been involved in
any meetings or those kind of things.
[1:06:10] And I I would encourage those who are
having meetings looking towards our
[1:06:15] future to always
think about invite
[1:06:20] the village of Williamsburg because they
certainly part of this
[1:06:26] and for that Mr.
I I don't know that I would support this
[1:06:30] in this in this context. Might support
it if we change a little bit of
[1:06:35] language, but
as as stated, I I would
[1:06:41] that's all I
appreciate your comments.
[1:06:46] I think that
a lot of the things that we do are are
[1:06:55] documents to move us forward. always
[snorts]
[1:07:01] with a backwards reflection things that
we can do better in the future.
[1:07:06] This is a first step.
The purpose is to enhance the
[1:07:12] cooperation between the city and the
county and trying to look forward that
[1:07:16] there are lands that are outside the
boundaries of TRC that may be available
[1:07:24] for development
and the county is not going to develop a
[1:07:29] water system or wastewater system, an
electrical grid
[1:07:35] and we do not want to inhibit devel
development, but we also want to work
[1:07:41] with the city so that if there are
extensions
[1:07:45] of utilities and infrastructure, the
city is dealing with that. I I really
[1:07:53] don't see where your comments about the
height of the steeple that the city is
[1:07:59] going to have any control over that.
This document doesn't say we're giving
[1:08:02] up that control. It does actually
because it says that they'll comply with
[1:08:07] the city's stony if they hook up to
their utilities and there is a height
[1:08:12] restriction on building heights in in
city of TC. There was a waiver given to
[1:08:18] the Holiday in I remember when that came
up you know and and I thought it was
[1:08:24] silly at that time. There was a waiver
given to the Baptist church downtown for
[1:08:28] building night. So as an example if
somebody wants to to Loves and wants to
[1:08:35] have a sign equally as high as Loves on
county property, it could very easily
[1:08:42] conceive that the city would kick in
their zoning and say, "No, you can't
[1:08:45] have that."
Now, as a developer and if somebody that
[1:08:50] has probably 40 years of experience in
this, the worst thing I can do is
[1:08:56] somebody coming to a community is coming
to somebody and say, "Oh, by the way, we
[1:09:01] have one other that you need to talk to.
If I'm talking directly to the city, I
[1:09:06] don't want to have to go to the county.
That is a deterrent to develop. I don't
[1:09:12] know where anybody can think any
different because I've been in these.
[1:09:16] It's a deterrent when if I go to the
county and we say, "Oh, by the way, you
[1:09:22] got to go talk to the city now and
they're going to review your your
[1:09:26] plans." Every time you add a layer of
review, you add an opportunity for Y
[1:09:32] like me to add a bunch of stuff that
well what about this what about this? So
[1:09:37] anybody that thinks that a memorandum of
understanding from a developer point of
[1:09:43] view where you put multiple agencies
together for review is strictly wrong.
[1:09:49] Developers don't want to go through
those layers. They want to deal with a
[1:09:52] single source.
[1:09:55] Mayor, Mr. Chairman, I I can assure you
that I understand that very very
[1:10:03] clearly.
>> Well, I don't doubt that. You also have
[1:10:08] your opinion.
>> Sure.
[1:10:10] » And and experience and I have experience
with height waivers. I built a twotory
[1:10:16] house and the limit was 28 ft and it was
31 ft. I had to get a a variance on that
[1:10:22] in 1997
and it was a simple step with the
[1:10:26] planning and zoning commission that
showed them that that was what I needed.
[1:10:30] vaulted interior.
>> But you weren't sinking $40 million into
[1:10:34] infrastructure.
>> Well, I was put in the house. It was
[1:10:38] pretty important to me. You understand?
>> Yes. I No, I understand. But I also
[1:10:45] develop. I mean, that was that was
private equity
[1:10:49] and I needed the variance and I saw it
and I got I think that what we're
[1:10:54] seeking and and Mr. Attorney, you're
going to have to help me out here and
[1:10:59] correct me. I don't see where we're
we're giving the zoning
[1:11:05] to the city for development on county
[1:11:11] outside the city of Tier City. Mr.
Chairman, only if they're going to be
[1:11:14] seeking something from the city. If
they're not seeking something from the
[1:11:17] city, if they install their own waste
water, they install their their own
[1:11:20] lines, then they don't need to cooperate
with the city. They don't need to engage
[1:11:24] with the city. If they're going to want
something from the city, then yes,
[1:11:26] they're going to need to engage from the
city.
[1:11:31] Okay.
Plain language,
[1:11:34] complying with all applicable city
ordinance, including but not limited to
[1:11:38] zoning,
technical standards, utility
[1:11:42] regulations, fee schedules, utility
service requirements, then in effect.
[1:11:47] So we clearly
are telling if they hook on to one thing
[1:11:53] from the city, the city has zoning
authority over on county property of
[1:11:58] which we have no zones.
[1:12:05] Is that uh true when they
provide the hookup and the city provides
[1:12:12] the services?
So if they built the water lines and and
[1:12:17] hooked on to the sewer at their cost,
Mr. Chairman, are you asking me a
[1:12:22] question? Yes. Um I would assume that
you are correct. So let me use again the
[1:12:28] case of where they came in with their
pre-development, their planning, and
[1:12:31] they asked what can we do? How are we
going to have to participate? We said,
[1:12:35] you know, here's where the sewer line
ends. Here's where the electric line,
[1:12:38] this is these are the areas where we
have it. In order to get it to you, it's
[1:12:42] going to
and you're going to need to we put
[1:12:45] together an agreement with them to say
if you do this we'll do this you pay us
[1:12:49] this we we'll make those things happen.
So yeah, that would be technically how
[1:12:54] it would work in our in our minds,
right? We would see that [clears throat]
[1:12:58] would come and sit you and they would
say, you know, what can you provide for
[1:13:03] us? You're going to say, we don't have
any services for utilities, but if you
[1:13:06] want to go talk to the city, they've got
them and then that developer would come
[1:13:09] and put together a deal. So the moment
they attach to our infrastructure, we
[1:13:14] would say in order to do so, we're going
to ask that you follow these height
[1:13:18] restrictions, these parking
restrictions, these building codes that
[1:13:22] we have not the building codes right
again the city does not enforce building
[1:13:26] codes that's done by the state
that is correct
[1:13:32] » Mr. Chairman
>> I'd like also it was our intention and
[1:13:38] still believe and I still stand that a
memorandum of understanding is no more
[1:13:41] than a document to offer the opportunity
for conformity and some possibility so
[1:13:47] whether you choose to do it or not
does exist. This basically just says,
[1:13:53] you know, we're going to be in the room
and at least have those conversations.
[1:13:57] » Thank you, Mr. Mr. Chairman. Two points
if I might. So, in section five, it
[1:14:01] makes clear that any applicant seeking
connection to the municipal utility
[1:14:04] system shall be responsible for
complying with those requirements.
[1:14:07] That's number one. The second part in
the following sentence, it says that
[1:14:11] nothing contained theou shall obligate
the county to require connection to city
[1:14:14] utilities where lawful alternatives are
otherwise available. So, if they don't
[1:14:17] have an intention to hook up to the
city's utilities, they need to comply
[1:14:20] with the city's requirements. If they
want to hook up to the city's utilities,
[1:14:23] they need to comply with the state
requirements. And that's really the the
[1:14:26] essence of this. That's what this
accomplishes. It makes clear to
[1:14:30] developers that, hey, look, if you're
going to want something from the city,
[1:14:33] then you need to go and visit the city.
If they don't want anything from the
[1:14:36] city, they don't need to go and visit
the city.
[1:14:42] » And Mr. chair and I would also add we
were really to add to the lane that only
[1:14:47] those properties that connect in
physical contact to the city's bound. So
[1:14:51] again, we wouldn't in this particular
case, I didn't want to extend that to
[1:14:55] somebody that's 10 miles away, right? Or
five miles away that may even still come
[1:14:59] to the city and say, "Hey, we'd really
like to buy water from you and we'll run
[1:15:03] the water line and connect." We would
recognize they're in the county and
[1:15:08] they're just buying a service from me.
And I would contractually decide whether
[1:15:11] or not I want to provide that service
for them. This would really only
[1:15:16] participate to those property owners
that where the boundaries physically
[1:15:20] touch and And there's a definite spot in
the jurisdiction and the opportunity
[1:15:24] exists. Again, at this current moment,
it's really the north side of town, you
[1:15:28] know, where we could have a
contradiction in in regulatory authority
[1:15:33] and there are other solutions besides us
partnering and finding that opportunity
[1:15:38] as well.
So, Mr. Chairman, Dave Gary,
[1:15:44] I think you just make my point.
Let's just assume
[1:15:52] The elephant in the room is gross
receipts tax.
[1:15:55] Love didn't show up there and get
concessions because they weren't going
[1:15:58] to pay a big chunk of gross receipts
tax. You agree with that?
[1:16:01] » Um I disagree with that.
>> They're paying a lot of money. That was
[1:16:06] come out of the mayor's mouth about how
much gross receipts, which is exactly
[1:16:10] mayor's what we should be looking for
for gross receipts. 100% agree with
[1:16:15] that.
If I if we put you in a negotiating
[1:16:19] position and and we have a gas station
and then a gas station is going to come
[1:16:26] in on on the county side that has a lot
of those receipts to it
[1:16:31] and it just provides the opportunity for
the city
[1:16:36] to maybe not give them a waiver on a
steep or it puts them in in a worse
[1:16:42] negotiating position if they ask for it.
So,
[1:16:47] and and I'm I'm not going to say another
thing on this. If there's if the word
[1:16:51] zoning is in this document, I won't I
won't support because I think if it's in
[1:16:55] here, this commission says, "Hey, we're
okay with zoning." And I don't want
[1:16:59] anybody thinking they're not promoting
zoning in any way, shape. That's all.
[1:17:06] Mr. Chairman, I would ask a moment to
respond. I think the two things on
[1:17:10] grocery tax and zoning are independent
of each other. Lo chose piece of
[1:17:14] property that it wanted to buy from a
private citizen to build their
[1:17:17] development which just happened to be
within the city boundaries of future
[1:17:20] consequences which required that they
follow the zoning. The fact that they
[1:17:24] were gross receipt tax opportunity then
opened the door for the community to
[1:17:29] then be decide whether and how
aggressive they wanted to attractively
[1:17:33] go after that business. Was the gross
receipt tax an opportunity? Yes. Not the
[1:17:37] zoning. And I the same point then just
to make that point the opportunity we
[1:17:42] would have would be then to just simply
say if a business is going to go in that
[1:17:45] particular area we will just annex that
puts me it makes me feel like I'm in a
[1:17:50] position of then higher authority and
I'm going to go automatically have the
[1:17:54] ability to take your authority away from
you immediately I have not reviewed the
[1:17:58] gross receipt tax into the spot where I
would understand if we annex how much
[1:18:03] gross receipt tax would the county get I
believe that you're going to be held
[1:18:06] neutral and you would receive the same
amount of gross receipt tax whether
[1:18:10] you're incorporated or not. So the
reality would become let me not do anou
[1:18:15] let me not create a partnership let me
not make sure that the county has the
[1:18:18] ability to say if you want those
services go talk to them because the
[1:18:21] situation is going to be the same. It
would be let me just wait and pounce the
[1:18:26] moment a business comes and decide how
far we want to extend our boundaries so
[1:18:30] that then we just create the opportunity
for ourselves because you are correct.
[1:18:34] If a business locates outside the count
outside the city limits in that location
[1:18:38] and we don't incorporate them the city
of truth or consequences will receive no
[1:18:42] gross receipt tax. And let me be clear
the city of truth of consequences does
[1:18:46] not live on property tax. As a manager,
as a citizen of this community, we are
[1:18:52] constantly being We are property owners
and we pay taxes and we have rights. The
[1:18:56] city receives such a minimal amount of
property tax yet the county receives all
[1:19:01] the property tax from the city of TRC.
That's how you live. All of our citizens
[1:19:05] pay you. Ours only live off gross
receipt tax. So you're right. I mean the
[1:19:10] right decision for me to be is to say
let's not do anou, but being aware that
[1:19:15] I'm ready to annex and and bring into
the city every possible opportunity
[1:19:20] where in this case it might advantageous
for the business to just locate partner
[1:19:25] with us get that done build it right be
consistent with our zones and then we
[1:19:29] attract the business so to be fair that
was the intent of this and I think gross
[1:19:34] receipt tax for the city of TC is a
secondary function to the requirements
[1:19:38] that the city has put in place for
zoning
[1:19:41] but you are correct you if they come to
us they're going to have to comply with
[1:19:45] our zoning
>> well said and they should and I and I I
[1:19:48] got that our gross receipts is
substantially less than
[1:19:52] So that's an advantage for someone to
move into into county and develop. But
[1:19:58] to but to your thought that well we'll
just go annex them. Um and and from a
[1:20:06] from the county's perspective, I would I
would encourage us to intervene in that.
[1:20:12] And and then I would ask areas that
aren't served by to your seat, across
[1:20:19] the river,
fairgrounds area, areas where there's
[1:20:23] negotiations to move them out to help
those citizens. I I would encourage them
[1:20:27] to say, "Wait a minute. We're not
getting services. Why are you chasing
[1:20:31] somebody that's just going to give you a
whole bunch of those receipts and let
[1:20:34] this let let us sit here who's been here
for 50 years and we don't get services?
[1:20:40] That's the that's how I would argue our
point from the county
[1:20:45] and and I think it I think it would make
your job a little tougher and and you
[1:20:49] might see the boundary commission on
that one. And and I will say this, as
[1:20:54] much as I don't like government getting
in the way of people, I am not at all
[1:20:59] worried about extra territorial.
If if we really want to have something
[1:21:04] that's going to plan out and and give a
solid road map to development that go
[1:21:10] along boundaries and within a mile of
that then to me the extr territorial
[1:21:15] zoning authority is the way to go
because then then it's clear there's no
[1:21:20] gray areas there's no well it's really
not binding anyway it is a
[1:21:25] straightforward approach and I think the
right way that most
[1:21:30] good communities [snorts] use to control
or to manage efficiency.
[1:21:38] That's it. So, thank Gary. Thanks a
million.
[1:21:41] Thank you. You're always so
[1:21:54] I always like when you find things
that this needs more Once we dropped it,
[1:22:00] there's nobody pressing on us. We just
felt it was an opportunity to make sure
[1:22:03] that as those items become prevalent up
there, we hope commission's pleased to
[1:22:09] move forward. We'll continue to operate
under the spirit of thisou where we look
[1:22:13] at this as a partnership and we hope to
work hand [snorts] in hand with the
[1:22:16] county so that again we're not in an
adverse position and say let's not worry
[1:22:21] about it. We'll just handex and deal
with the courts and how that's going to
[1:22:24] play out. That's the ultimate before we
end up getting
[1:22:30] » well the idea of thisou was in a spirit
of cooperation and a spirit of openness
[1:22:36] and transparency and I really appreciate
that I understand where commissioner
[1:22:40] Jones is. I guess I would question
Commissioner Hopkins Hopkins appetite
[1:22:46] for proceeding in a motion.
>> Well, I ask
[1:22:53] you feel comfortable with memor
of understanding. Correct,
[1:22:58] » Mr. Chairman. It's a memorandum of
understanding we negotiated and include
[1:23:02] those provisions that I need to include
to protect the county's jurisdiction and
[1:23:06] and protect its authority. But it
certainly remains in the commission's
[1:23:10] discretion whether or not to or whether
or not to move in a different direction.
[1:23:13] I mean, that's for the commission to
decide, not for me. We had a proposal by
[1:23:17] the city um in relation to this. Um and
we went through that carefully. We
[1:23:21] identified our concerns, they heard our
concerns, they incorporated our
[1:23:24] concerns, and the board raises
additional concerns. I mean, just
[1:23:28] because I raised the concerns doesn't
mean those are the only kind of
[1:23:30] concerns. And so, we've heard some
additional concerns here raised today.
[1:23:33] And certainly, it remains in the
county's discretion whether or not to
[1:23:36] direct that we revise the the to remove
the word zoning from the instances word
[1:23:41] of tears or what what it would like for
us to do. I mean whether or not he wants
[1:23:45] to consider this in the first instance.
[1:23:50] » I hate to do this to you
but you brought up a perfect question.
[1:23:58] So this gets triggered if our boundaries
meet correct.
[1:24:07] So
[1:24:11] Gas station B is going to locate
[1:24:17] 100 ft off the boundary.
[1:24:22] I have a ranch above there. I buy a
rideway along your boundary. Go through
[1:24:28] gas station. No longer owns that
property. We're no longer continuous.
[1:24:33] Does that work? So that now if you want
to extend services
[1:24:40] you you may or may not do the zoning if
we break that boundary line.
[1:24:46] » Mr. Chairman, Mr. Jones, I would assume
that in every instance when a developer
[1:24:50] chooses to ask the city of truth and
consequences to provide them a service,
[1:24:54] we're going to ask that developer to
comply with our
[1:24:58] » and I and I think and I I have no issue
with that.
[1:25:01] » Thank you.
and Mayor Oak
[1:25:08] both you may appreciate. So don't take
this.
[1:25:14] You said that three times.
[1:25:18] Mr. Chairman
ask some good questions. Don't say
[1:25:22] you're done if you're not.
So Hank, is there an appetite for a
[1:25:27] motion?
>> Yes. Mr. Chair, I move to approve the
[1:25:33] I have a motion. Uh I think in the guise
of cooperation
[1:25:41] and this document is flexible and we can
change it in the future. I will second
[1:25:50] do that for you.
So we have a motion in a second. Amy,
[1:25:56] let's do a roll call on this issue.
Commissioner,
[1:26:00] » yes.
>> Hopkins,
[1:26:02] » yes.
>> Commissioner Jones,
[1:26:03] » no.
>> Motion is passed with one. Thank you,
[1:26:08] gentlemen. Gary, thank you for taking
time out of your day. It helped a bunch
[1:26:12] of you here. Dave, thank you for your
coordination, your legal research.
[1:26:17] Mayors always appreciate your presence
and you help just being here. Thank you,
[1:26:23] Mr. Chairman. If I could comment on one
comment about Williamsburg and again it
[1:26:27] would be nice if the mayor was here but
the city of TC under my leadership I
[1:26:31] take my relationship with Williamsburg
very seriously um I've updated many of
[1:26:37] the agreements that we have and we have
agreements that are more than 50 years
[1:26:40] old village of Williamsburg to provide
the water waste water trash animal
[1:26:45] control and so I think that's and I
appreciate Commissioner Jones bringing
[1:26:48] that up there an important player their
landlock their ability to create revenue
[1:26:53] their ability to promote and grow their
city is limited. So I think again
[1:26:57] they're a key part of us and
we're happy to do that. So I just want
[1:27:02] to make sure that we we do take that
relationship.
[1:27:07] Thank you. Thank you for your time.
>> We also coordinate
[1:27:11] as elected officials with the mayor of
Williamsburg and she's included in the
[1:27:17] information. Uh we do have what amounts
to monthly breakfasts with the mayors
[1:27:24] and the chair and and
the mayor of Williamsburg has made a
[1:27:29] couple of those and she's not been able
to make the others but she's always
[1:27:32] invited. Thank you
>> and thank you.
[1:27:36] » Just to be clear
city mayor I think you know my
[1:27:42] commitment to the city of TC. We
certainly worked together on on flood
[1:27:47] control stuff. I'm in 100%.
Um, and we do have an MOU sitting out
[1:27:54] there. My commitment is straight.
$400,000 there. We're looking at other
[1:28:00] commitments to to enhance those flood
control projects. And there's not one
[1:28:05] piece of paper between us other than us
agreeing, Mr. Mayor, you and me and
[1:28:12] manager that
we're we're going to support you with
[1:28:16] those numbers. So, I hope that is not an
indication that I don't want to
[1:28:20] cooperate with you and I'm fully ready
to do so.
[1:28:24] » I take that as a question, sir. And so,
unequivocally, Mr.
[1:28:29] your friends. You helped us when we
asked you to help. You had dialogue with
[1:28:34] us when we required it. We appreciate
your counsel and thank you for being
[1:28:40] here and we're not going anywhere on
that support. Mayor, same thing. We have
[1:28:45] substantial commitment there and that's
working our way through. We haven't
[1:28:50] changed that commitment in any way. So,
we're going to make sure that we help
[1:28:54] that neighborhood as well. So, again, no
big documents. No fancy ribbon cutings,
[1:29:00] just a straight commitment. And I think
that's the way government.
[1:29:04] We will get on with new business.
[1:29:08] Item A is direction to staff to publish
the title general subject matter of an
[1:29:13] ordinance repealing Sierra County
avironment lead ordinance 20-00.
[1:29:23] » Mr. Hopefully this will be similar much
much simpler. So uh back in 2020 the
[1:29:28] board adopted uh ordinance 20-004
approving a lita for a environment and
[1:29:34] pursuing that they were supposed to make
a 2 million $2.5 million contribution in
[1:29:39] capital investment in the community and
30 full-time jobs. Unfortunately that
[1:29:42] never materialized. Um we received a
request from Enemy Ed the economic
[1:29:46] development department um that we repeal
um ordinance 20004 and this is the first
[1:29:52] step in doing that. So, what we're going
to be asking from the board here is a
[1:29:56] direction to publish the title and
general subject matter, the ordinance
[1:29:59] repealing the LITA ordinance and
approving that funding for um
[1:30:05] environment and then we'll have a public
hearing and a final action at the next
[1:30:09] commission.
>> Any questions or comments?
[1:30:16] I would
send this to
[1:30:22] a
>> correct.
[1:30:23] » Yes, sir. So, we'll we'll we'll direct
the the publication the title and
[1:30:26] general subject matter. It'll be in the
paper and then we'll have that hearing
[1:30:30] next.
[1:30:33] All in favor say I.
>> I. That motion passes.
[1:30:42] We'll go on to the
beverage control division
[1:30:49] small blue offsite intake application
for blue lab 101.
[1:30:54] Mr. Chairman, members of the board, um
we had a public hearing earlier. We
[1:30:58] heard from the applicant, not a whole
lot from them, but we did proceed our
[1:31:01] package the application. Um, this board
is required to have shortly to hold
[1:31:05] public hearing to determine one whether
the proposed location is in the area
[1:31:09] where the sale of alcoholic beverages
prohibited by school law and that be
[1:31:13] within 300 ft of a church or school. Um,
two whether the issuance or transfer
[1:31:17] would be in violation of zoning or other
ordinance the governing body and as
[1:31:20] commissioner Jones we don't have zoning.
So, uh, and number three uh, the
[1:31:25] issuance or transfer would be
detrimental to public health safety or
[1:31:27] morals of the residents of the county.
Um and here as it relates to that item,
[1:31:32] the the district courts have made or the
court of appeals made clear that the
[1:31:35] denial or trans of a transfer of a
liquor license or the issuance of a
[1:31:39] liquor license must be based on finding
of health, safety or moral hazards at
[1:31:42] that particular location. So it's only
subject to denial if we have concern
[1:31:47] about the specific area in which they
operated. Next time for any questions
[1:31:50] from the board, Mr. Chairman, I move to
approve. Second move and second. All in
[1:31:55] favor say I. I. Motion approved. Thank
you.
[1:32:00] Item C, road closure request, New Mexico
Spaceport Authority for September 2026.
[1:32:07] Good morning.
>> Good morning.
[1:32:10] We are asking for blanket authority for
the month of September.
[1:32:14] on Monday
and 14
[1:32:20] sometimes things change
[1:32:27] and 14th as
[1:32:37] all the people out there
>> individuals are impacted by specific
[1:32:43] customer will not be
[1:32:52] approved
[1:33:02] for
have a motion and a second. All in favor
[1:33:06] say I. That motion passes
[1:33:11] request. from Cooperative Extension
Services in Mexico State requesting
[1:33:17] financial support. Sarah,
Amanda,
[1:33:23] Jenny, we appreciate you ladies being
here.
[1:33:30] » Good morning.
[1:33:34] » A few minutes. Good morning,
commissioner.
[1:33:37] Uh I'm here today to discuss the future
of the additional for position um that
[1:33:43] has been a really vital role to the
county's youth programming specifically
[1:33:48] uh for and non-traditional youth
programming. Um last year Sierra
[1:33:53] Community First Foundation provided the
funding that allowed us to establish
[1:33:58] this position. Um but that funding is no
longer going to be available. Uh this
[1:34:02] position has significantly expanded our
school enrichment efforts um allowing us
[1:34:09] to reach youth who might not otherwise
uh participate in traditional forage
[1:34:14] programming. Uh the individual currently
serving in the role has also done an
[1:34:19] excellent job in securing grants and
other resources that she will talk a
[1:34:23] little more specifically about. Um
that has really helped um additionally
[1:34:31] support programing in our classrooms. It
would be unfortunate to lose both the
[1:34:35] position and the momentum that was
created through that work. Um, and we
[1:34:39] respectfully ask that the county um
partner with us in identifying
[1:34:43] sustainable funding whether through
county support or other community
[1:34:47] resources so that these valuable
opportunities can continue um for youth
[1:34:53] and young people throughout our county.
Um I have also sent this report on to uh
[1:35:00] your county manager. Um but I'll
highlight some of the things that
[1:35:05] happened this past year. Uh there were
around 1,200 youth reached and that is
[1:35:10] not our traditional 4 kids. Those are um
directly involved in their classrooms
[1:35:17] with agriculture based programs.
We did this pro this position also
[1:35:23] secured
three um significant grants. One being
[1:35:28] hydroponics teachers training grant, a
school garden and hydroponics expansion
[1:35:33] grant and then the CES innovation grant
um specifically for school enrichment
[1:35:39] and STEM projects within the classroom.
Um I am more than welcome to give you
[1:35:44] guys all of this stuff or she can
forward it on to you guys as well.
[1:35:52] I think um specifically with some of the
grants that were applied for I want to
[1:35:57] say they were close to about $25,000
worth of grants that um were applied for
[1:36:02] and received [snorts] uh that that is
currently andor needs to be utilized
[1:36:07] within those classroom um environments.
Uh our office looks like
[1:36:14] an Amazon store right now because of all
the equipment and supplies and stuff
[1:36:19] that is currently being purchased with a
lot of that um money to utilize with a
[1:36:24] lot of school program. It' be
unfortunate event if that stuff did not
[1:36:29] get into those hands those kids because
of the position no longer being funded
[1:36:34] but the programming was funded and is
sitting there readily available. We
[1:36:38] would just ask for your support.
>> I've got a question for you. Is the city
[1:36:43] participating in this or
>> it is my understanding they are doing so
[1:36:48] » and I can speak on firsthand knowledge
of what's going on in the classroom.
[1:36:52] I've seen these ladies all three of them
go up into the classrooms. Uh each grade
[1:36:57] level is targeted with a subject matter
whether it be hatching chicks growing
[1:37:02] mushrooms the kids look forward to it
and I think it's a worthwhile investment
[1:37:08] for for our kids.
[1:37:13] How much do you want?
[1:37:18] » Let's get down to the stack.
>> Okay, Commissioner Jones, I can kind of
[1:37:21] go into that. So, their original ask was
$25,000. I did speak with Gary
[1:37:25] Whitehead, city manager, and he agreed
that $15,000 from the city and that
[1:37:30] would give the county an additional
10,000 that we would give them. We are
[1:37:33] currently now, I believe, $60,000 we
contribute and this would increase our
[1:37:37] contribution from 60 to 70.
And if I can just add, uh, the city of
[1:37:45] Storo and Sakoro County uh, just last
year created almost the identical
[1:37:51] position. Um, and I believe their city,
city of Sakoro, contributes 12 and then
[1:37:57] the county does whatever they do and
then they have a few other sources for
[1:38:02] almost the identical position.
[1:38:07] » It appears we're getting down their part
of the deal.
[1:38:10] 15. We're going to do 10.
>> Is 10 enough?
[1:38:13] » But added to the 60,000.
>> We already got 60 in there. [laughter]
[1:38:18] » We're not talking about that. We're
talking about this%
[1:38:26] that 60,000 has increased over the years
and that's been the best investment that
[1:38:31] we've made and the county has authorized
that every year.
[1:38:36] Is there a motion or is there any
discussion. Well, I think K asked if
[1:38:42] that was enough.
>> Commissioner, I guess to answer that
[1:38:47] question, you know, I think for right
now, yes. Um, we have some funding that
[1:38:54] Mr. Tom was able to secure that I guess
in a sense is going to get us by. Um, so
[1:39:01] for now, yes,
>> if you ever run short, you know where to
[1:39:04] go. I think all three of us support
>> we appreciate that. Thank you very much.
[1:39:09] » I'd like all three of us to make the
motion.
[1:39:15] » Mr. Chair, I move to approve request
letters
[1:39:20] requesting.
[1:39:27] [laughter]
[1:39:30] » We have a motion in a second.
All in favor say I.
[1:39:36] » [laughter]
[1:39:39] » You heard that sneaky way Hank was
bringing that in.
[1:39:42] » I heard it.
>> No, you guys are doing a fantastic job.
[1:39:45] » Thank you. Thank you.
>> We'll go to item 10 contracts,
[1:39:51] agreements, and procurement county of
Sierra City regarding administration
[1:39:58] of the city's flood plane management
regulations. Good morning, Barbara. Good
[1:40:02] morning chair and commissioners. Yes,
today we're
[1:40:07] another agreement for administration of
city flood management regulations but
[1:40:12] this time with
utilized
[1:40:17] last month
[1:40:24] to develop the agreement that's before
you and county are both participating
[1:40:30] commities. insurance program and desires
to utilize the services of the flood
[1:40:37] administrator for the county to
administer.
[1:40:42] This agreement stipulates the responsib
[1:41:01] behind that but it will still terminate
on June 30th of 2030.
[1:41:06] » That's correct. And that date was
intentional because the services have
[1:41:10] been
during
[1:41:22] » there is no charge similar to the
template.
[1:41:26] » I just saw something in there about
surplus. Okay.
[1:41:31] I move. I second. All in favor say I.
Motion passes.
[1:41:38] Agreement is approved. Thank you.
We'll go to resolutions.
[1:41:46] Ordinances and proclamations.
Item is 2026-55
[1:41:53] authorizing the donation and transfer of
the 2022 Dodge Ram Pro Master
[1:42:00] bus to the city of TRC.
>> Good morning.
[1:42:06] This resolution is to request approval
to donate and transfer that Dodge Ram
[1:42:12] access to the city consequences. The
county originally purchased the vehicle
[1:42:18] for
with legislative appropriation in 2023.
[1:42:23] The vehicle is in excellent operating
condition with 169 miles. the vehicle
[1:42:30] used by the city and continue to benefit
the community. Because the specialized
[1:42:34] convers,000
[1:42:41] based on the conditionable
[1:42:46] market information because the value of
the asset exceeds the state's $30,000
[1:42:51] threshold for disposition of property.
The transfer will also require approval.
[1:42:59] So approval of this resolution will
allow us to submit the transfer request
[1:43:03] to DFA and authorize the donation and
transfer to the city of TC contingent
[1:43:09] upon
[1:43:14] any questions or comments.
[1:43:20] » It has
[1:43:26] bought it.
Commissioner Jones and chair. Yes, I can
[1:43:31] I can answer that question kind of. I
mean, I was bought it was bought prior
[1:43:35] to me coming on board. My understanding
it was originally purchased to do they
[1:43:39] used to do the uh van around town when
they pick people up and take them to
[1:43:43] different places that we received that
van. When after we received that van,
[1:43:47] the transportation became better. I
guess was that the south central transit
[1:43:53] district has started running that bus. I
was we were approached by the city of
[1:43:57] Tierc asking if we'd be willing to
transfer that over for some programming
[1:44:01] they would like to use it for. I know
that they have some music in the park I
[1:44:05] believe coming up that they'd like to
use it to transport people from a
[1:44:08] parking lot to there. So that is why
we're getting rid of it. Sierra County
[1:44:13] no longer needs it. That program has
since gone to someone else.
[1:44:17] » So
we're just going to give grant for free.
[1:44:22] going to buy it or
>> No, we're going to assuming they're
[1:44:25] donating. We're donating the van. Is
that correct?
[1:44:28] » It was purchased.
>> It was Yes. It was not purchased with
[1:44:32] county funding. It's purchased with
state funding.
[1:44:47] Too bad they just left.
[1:44:52] Why don't we just put it up for sale
and take the $80,000?
[1:44:57] » My understanding is if we do that with
the legislative appropriation, we don't
[1:45:00] get to keep the funding. We send it back
to the state,
[1:45:05] » which is where probably ought to be
anyway. We shouldn't have bothered if we
[1:45:09] use it.
>> Whatever. At the time, there was a
[1:45:14] program that went from Elephant View to
downtown with
[1:45:19] drivers and that program fell by the
wayside
[1:45:26] after the purchase of the bus and it was
not utilized. I would personally much
[1:45:32] rather see it go to where it's going to
be utilized. We talked to the city at
[1:45:36] some length and
it meets their needs. So
[1:45:44] I don't see this as being
how land is transferred. I would much
[1:45:51] rather see it used. We took it to
spaceport to the regional space
[1:45:57] and did a tour out there and I think
that was the first time it's been driven
[1:46:00] in about six months.
So we could like organizing
[1:46:12] that donation clause.
We can donate it to a city, but we can't
[1:46:16] donate it to a nonprofit or anything
like that.
[1:46:21] » We can sell it or have $80,000 in their
pocket to do that
[1:46:25] » unless they had to go back to
[1:46:32] » we could we could sell it and not get
$8,000
[1:46:36] auction.
I uh this is one of the places where the
[1:46:42] coordination with the city
I think shines and
[1:46:49] I'm personally for the transfer. So it's
their motion.
[1:46:57] » So they got anything they swap us for?
>> Is there something else they could maybe
[1:47:05] swap us on? That's the one we
[1:47:12] couple of water.
[1:47:21] They can use it.
[1:47:32] The chair will make a motion to approve
resolution 2026-55
[1:47:39] authorizing donation and transfer of the
2022 Dodge Ram bus to the city of Truth
[1:47:45] and Consequences
[1:47:54] and second. All in favor say I.
>> I. Those opposed say
[1:48:01] I didn't say no.
Motion passed.
[1:48:07] Thank you. Resolution 2026-56
[1:48:12] FY27 budget adjustment resolution.
>> This resolution is to amend the FY27.
[1:48:22] The first adjustment that we're making
is for $1,000 donation
[1:48:27] to fire from
their efforts during the fire.
[1:48:33] will go towards things like
[1:48:38] the next three adjustments to our
revenue or to correct um
[1:48:45] revenue that should have been
outditioned
[1:48:57] by the state. This will reduce that to
zero. Additionally, we'reing up two
[1:49:02] revenue lines for our biz and rise
grants for the final reimbursement
[1:49:06] request received in fiscal year.
[1:49:11] The
next set of amendments is to carry over
[1:49:16] budget in our grant fund from fiscal
year 26 for grants in the clerk's office
[1:49:20] for a total of 8577.
We also have a carryover of $40,000 for
[1:49:26] a grant from New Mexico gas that was by
the state.
[1:49:32] The last adjustment is to increase the
minor equipment budget in the treasure
[1:49:36] treasurer fees fund for $10,000. These
funds are available in the existing fund
[1:49:42] does not impact the general fund and it
will be used for the purchase of
[1:49:46] computer and monitor replacements the
treasur's office.
[1:49:52] Any questions?
[1:49:58] » Is there a motion?
[1:50:06] » Second. All in favor say I. I
[1:50:16] motion passes.
Thank you. Resolution 202657
[1:50:21] authorizing and approving submission of
a completed application for financial
[1:50:26] assistance and project approval to the
New Mexico Finance Authority. Manager B.
[1:50:32] » Thank you chair and commissioners. So uh
back in May we passed the um affordable
[1:50:37] housing resolution and I was tasked with
going out and finding a grant to help
[1:50:41] fund that plan through the department of
finance. They have a grant that does
[1:50:45] require a match. I have written the
grant and the last pieces to get this
[1:50:49] resolution authorizing me to apply for
that. With that, I'll stand for any
[1:50:53] questions.
>> You say does or does not require
[1:50:57] » it does require match. It's it's on a
sliding scale depending on some other
[1:51:03] items. There's quite a few pieces that
we've done these scratch, not while I've
[1:51:06] been here, but a couple times before.
>> What do you think that
[1:51:10] » I think it's 10% for us?
>> What do you think the number is going to
[1:51:13] be?
>> Probably around 100,000. So, 10% of
[1:51:17] that. So, could city of TRC get that
$8,000?
[1:51:24] » You know, that's a great idea.
>> I'll work on that one.
[1:51:26] » We'll get that in.
>> We amend that last resolution.
[1:51:29] » Don't need to. I think we just as much.
>> That's creative, but I question the
[1:51:34] legality.
>> I question the whole
[1:51:40] move.
>> I have a motion. Is there
[1:51:45] second? All in favor say I.
[1:51:55] » You got a vote. That motion passes. We
have no executive session.
[1:52:01] The next regular meeting will be
Tuesday, September 15,
[1:52:06] 2026.
Is there a motion to adjourn?
[1:52:10] » We are ajourned. Thank you everyone.
Always
[1:52:32] a joy.