[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.

Sierra County Special Commission Meeting- August 18th, 2026

Transcript