Page 1 of 19 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES ...

Page 1 of 19

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 2:00 P.M. Monday, January 12, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 2:02:23 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 2:02 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 2:02:29 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno (joined meeting at 2:10 p.m.), Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 2:02:44 p.m.) The invocation was given by Pastor Pete Vossler of the Crosswinds Assembly of God church. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 2:03:40 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by City Attorney Chet Adams. *Comments from the Public (Time: 2:04:11 p.m.) Ms. Heidi Rashidi, a Sparks Police Department employee asked that her comments be put into the minutes, verbatim, as follows:

��

�� !� � �� "�� #�� $$� �� $�

�"��#"��"��#"��%��% ��#��&��!�

��"�� "�� $$��"��&��'��$��$��

��$$��$��("�� "% �"�� !��

��)"��"�'��"��'�� "�� *��'�

�� +��$��

, �� "�� $�� #"�%��-� � , ��

�"�� .�"�� $$�� +�� /��

"��#��+��"��#��"��-�

, �� "�� $��

� ��"��"��-�

� �� "��

#��"�� "� ��%��%�� 0%��

#��"#1!�

�� $��"�� "��"��#�� "��#��

��$$�� "��"��#��%��!�� #��

� ��%��%��"��2�

, �� %�� *�-�� +��

34��555��!�� %�� %��$�.��"��'��

��%�� 6�� -�

, �� "��"��&��6�� 78�555��945�555��!��

, ��$�� .��$��$�� %��

�$�� -� �, �� %��%� ��

��-��, �� #��%-�

Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting for January 12, 2009

Page 2 of 19

, �� :� �� %�� %� � �� $�

934��555��-��

, ��33��%��$�� %��$��%��

��+��9;7�555��-�

, �� . ��$��"��.�"��.�� ::�855��

�� "��.�"��.��-�

� ��("��$��$�� %�� "�� '��$�

� ��% ��%��"��'�� "�� %��!��

.��.�"��"��#��%�� +��$�� $��'��

<� ��!� � �$� � �� +�� #�"�� #��$�� '� � ��"��#��"��%��!��

� �� ("��$�� !��

�� "�� $$��#"�� "�� "��"��

��$$�� '��"�� "��$��"�� !��<�"��

��"��#��.&= �� %�� % ��$��"�� ><��?�

��$�� "% �!�

�� %��%� ��$$�� %� �� % ��

��%��"�!��<�"�@� ��A� �� . ��$��$��$��'�

� �� #�� #"��#��"��$�� '��

��$�� #��=� ��?�

� ��"!�

Council Member Schmitt stated that the Council and City cannot spend money it doesn’t have and asked Ms. Rashidi if it would be fair for every employee to give up 4% of their salary in order to avoid any layoffs. Ms. Rashidi stated that the reason they voted not to give up 4% was because the City could not guarantee that there would be no layoffs, even it they did give up 4% of their salary. Council Member Carrigan asked how OE3 voted on the proposed 4% pay cut for all employees so that layoffs were not necessary. Ms. Rashidi stated they voted no, for the reasons she just stated. Mr. Brian Kernan, a Project Director for Q&D Construction, spoke regarding his concern with the recent reductions in staff in the Community Development Department. He said they have another $25 million in construction about to begin and his concern was that there would be a delay in getting approvals due to the staff reductions and a cut in business hours for this department. Community Development Director Neil Krutz stated that their ability to handle future work loads will depend on the rate in which it comes in. He agreed that they have had to make severe cut backs in staff and their ability to provide service has been affected. Council Member Schmitt stated that they are aware of the concern from the Development Community, but that if the applications are complete and spaced out over four to six weeks, staff should be able to get the applications processed. Mayor Martini emphasized the need for the developers to make sure that their applications are complete and contain all the needed information before it is submitted. Council Members Ratti and Smith agreed that the cuts to the Community Development Department were severe, but that the remaining staff will do their best to get all applications processed in a timely manner. (Time: 2:57:35 p.m.) Mayor Martini noted that Mr. McGee thought the meeting started at 3:00 p.m. and asked the


Page 3 of 19

indulgence of the Council to allow Mr. McGee to make his public comments at this time. Mr. Ronald McGee spoke regarding his desire to run for Sparks City Council. He also complained about the appearance of four police patrol vehicles parked at a Wendy’s for approximately one hour. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 2:17:59 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. Mayor Martini asked that item 6.7 be moved and heard after the public hearing item (8.1). A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: (Time: 2:19:25 p.m.) 3.1 Regular Meetings of December 8, 2008 and December 15, 2008 A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meetings of December 8, 2008 and December 15, 2008. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Fairness in Reno Sparks Taxes (FIRST) Blue Ribbon Task Force final report (Time: 2:20:01 p.m.)

Community Relations Manager Adam Mayberry introduced the Chair of the FIRST Committee, Mr. Michael Sprinkle and noted that other members of the task force were present in the audience. Mr. Mayberry stated that the focus of the commission was to look at fiscal equity issues in Washoe County, Reno, and Sparks. Mr. Sprinkle thanked everyone for volunteering their time on this task force and then reviewed the findings of the task force. Mayor Martini thanked the committee members for all their hard work and handed out plaques to the members of the task force. 5. Consent Items: (Time: 2:08:21 p.m.) Council Member Smith commented that he thought the Council no longer had to approve the Alcohol/Gaming licenses. City Attorney Adams noted that staff is working on changing this; however the Council must approve these licenses until a formal delineation of duties can be done. Council Member Smith expressed concern that the license approvals did not get delayed because the Council is only meeting twice a month. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.8. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

5.1 Report of Claims and Bills approved for payment and the appropriation

transfers are for the period November 27, 2008, through December 24, 2008 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.


Page 4 of 19

5.2 Consideration and possible approval of an application for an Alcoholic Beverage Package license for Golden Gate Petroleum of Nevada, LLC dba Golden Gate Gasoline, located at 1055 Rock Boulevard, Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Dennis Michael O’Keefe

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for an Alcoholic Beverage Package License for Golden Gate Gasoline. The license will provide a $700.00 annual fee plus $1.00 per $1,000.00 over $25,000.00 annually and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.

5.3 Consideration and possible approval of an application for a Gaming license

for Golden Gate Petroleum of Nevada, LLC dba Golden Gate Gasoline, located at 1055 Rock Boulevard, Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Dennis Michael O’Keefe

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for a Gaming License for Golden Gate Gasoline. The license will provide a $1,680.00 annual fee for 14 quarter slot machines; contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.

5.4 Consideration and possible approval of an application for a Cabaret license

for Vixens, LLC, located at 906 Victorian Avenue, Sparks, NV, submitted by Ms. Kasia Agnieszka Schuhmacher

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for a Cabaret License for Vixens. The license will provide a $1,300.00 annual fee, plus $1.00 per $1,000.00 over $50,000.00 annually and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of the purchase of chemicals pursuant

to Bid #05/06-010, for two weeks, from November 1, 2008, to November 14, 2008, to Univar USA, Inc. for Methanol supplied to the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility for the total amount of $82,199.03

An agenda item from Operations Superintendent Starlin Jones recommending the City Council approve the purchase of chemicals as outlined in the staff report. Sparks’ cost is approximately 30% or $24,659.71 and funds have been budgeted for this expense. The new bid for chemicals was not fully executed until mid November and the old bid expired October 31, 2008. Univar USA, Inc., agreed to continue supplying methanol until the new supplier, Brenntag, was in position to procure and supply methanol to the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval to AJS Construction for the Longford Park Renovation Project to remove a wooden shade structure and footings and replace with new concrete pad with footings in the amount of $29,350 and to include a force account in the amount of $5,000 for a total amount of $34,350

An agenda item from Parks Operations Superintendent Brian Bessette recommending the City Council award to AJS Construction, the quote for the Longford Park Renovation. The scope of work includes removal of a wooden shade structure and footings and replacing it with a new concrete pad and footings in preparation for a new shade structure, which is not included in this quote. Funds are available and have been appropriated for this capital improvement project.


Page 5 of 19

5.7 Consideration and possible approval of the Consultant Services Agreement with HDR Engineering, Inc., for the Derby Dam Wetland Delineation and Regulatory Permitting in the amount of $52,660 with Sparks reimbursing the City of Reno their share in the amount of $16,519.44

An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel recommending the City Council approve a Consultant Services Agreement with HDR Engineering for the Derby Dam Wetland Delineation project. Under a Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) Grant, the Cities of Reno and Sparks are proposing a vegetation and streamside restoration project on the Truckee River, below the Derby Dam. The grant program is for projects to improve the health of and increase water flow to Pyramid Lake and the lower Truckee River. Sparks will reimburse Reno for our share of the project in the amount of $16,519.44. Funds have been budgeted and appropriations are available for this project.

5.8 Consideration and possible approval to purchase three shade structures for

the Rock Park White Water Construction Project with Dave Bang Assoc., Inc. in the amount of $69,319

An agenda item from Parks Operations Superintendent Brian Bessette recommending the City Council approve the purchase of three shade structures for Rock Park, associated with the White Water Project. The existing structure was removed to make way for upgrades to the river. The three new structures will be placed throughout the park and they are fully funded. The quote provided reflects the use of the “joinder” provision of a bid contract between Dave Bang Associates (the vendor) and the Colton joint Unified School District and reflects significant volume pricing. Staff has verified that the quoted price was the best available when compared to manufacturers of similar design. 6. General Business:

6.1 Consideration and possible acceptance of a grant from the E.L. Cord Foundation of $50,000 for the Sparks Parks and Recreation Department to continue the Leisure Without Limits Program for People with Disabilities in 2009 (Time: 2:30:37 p.m.)

Recreation Superintendent Tracy Domingues explained that the Leisure without Limits program allows people with disabilities have the opportunity to take part in recreational activities. Although staff has worked to maintain quality services through community partnerships and new revenue sources, sever department cut backs have forced us to eliminate non-revenue generating programs such as Leisure without Limits, beginning in 209. In an effort to continue this programming, staff submitted grant funding requests for this programming. On December 9, the department received notification of a grant award from the E.L. Cord Foundation in the amount of $50,000. In response to questions, Ms. Domingues noted that the program has been funded in the past from the Parks and Recreation budget. This is the first time we have received a grant from the E.L. Cord Foundation for this program and staff asked for a two year grant, but the foundation only gives grants on a one year basis. She said the foundation wants to make sure we keep good records and spend the money wisely. She stated staff was encouraged to apply for another grant next year.


Page 6 of 19

Council Member Ratti commented that there is a huge shortage of these types of programs in our area and she commended the Recreation staff for their efforts in providing this programming for people with disabilities. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to accept the grant from the E.L. Cord Foundation in the amount of $50,000 for the Sparks Parks and Recreation Department to continue the Leisure Without Limits Program for People with Disabilities in 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.2 Discussion and possible approval to Designate the Reno Housing Authority

to Implement the Dollar Homes Program on behalf of the City of Sparks (Time: 2:37:09 p.m.)

Grant Administrator Tracy Wheeler stated approval of this item would authorize the Reno Housing Authority to act on behalf of Sparks to implement a program, via the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). She stated this is not a new program, but has been ongoing for quite some time. Under this program, HUD allows local governments to purchase properties that have been in their inventory for a long period of time for $1 (plus closing and rehabilitation costs) as part of providing affordable and fair housing in a community. In response to questions from Council, Mr. David Morton, Executive Director of the Housing Authority of the City of Reno, explained how the program works and the benefits of the program. Mayor Martini noted that although this is not a public hearing item, Ms. Marilyn Brainard had requested to speak regarding this item and in the spirit of the open meeting law, he would allow her comments. Ms. Brainard commented regarding the importance of encouraging homeownership and the need to require upkeep and maintenance on homes that are being foreclosed. Council requested that staff examine City ordinances for any requirements that would require the owners of foreclosed homes to keep the homes maintained during the foreclosure process and while the homes are sitting vacant. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to designate the Reno Housing Authority to implement the Dollar Homes Program on behalf of the City of Sparks. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.3 Consideration and possible approval of a professional services agreement

with HDR Engineering, Inc. for professional engineering services for Phase 2 of the North Truckee Drain Realignment project, design and permitting in the amount of $4,788,451 (RFP #03/04-052) (Time: 3:01:31 p.m.)

Public Works Director Wayne Seidel noted this item was brought to the Council for approval in July; however, because all the Council Members were not present at that meeting, no action was taken. He noted that since that date, the City has received our “104” letter from the Corps of Engineers. This letter states that these expenditures are eligible and integral to the larger flood


Page 7 of 19

project, as recognized by the Corps of Engineers. Mr. Seidel stated that the scope of work has been revised, including the schedule. This is an 18 month design contract at a cost of approximately $4.7 million dollars. He said we anticipate that we will put the project out for bid in July of 2010; ahead of the Corps’ chief report which is due in October of 2010. Council Member Salerno asked what the ramifications would be if the Council did not approve this design contract. Mr. Seidel stated it would delay the entire flood project. Mr. Salerno expressed concern that this project not be delayed because it was important to the business owners that experienced flooding in the industrial zone during the last flood event. Council Member Smith asked if this $4.7 million constituted approximately 4% of the anticipated cost of the entire Truckee River Flood Project. Mr. Seidel stated the current cost estimate is $60 to $100 million and the cost is due to the degree of difficulty of the project. Council Member Carrigan commented that one of the concerns the last time that this contract came before the council for approval was whether or not this project would count toward Sparks’ portion of the cost of the entire flood project. He asked if this issue had been resolved. Mr. Seidel confirmed that the letter from the Corps of Engineer officially recognizes this project as an integral, eligible part of the whole project. Mayor Martini commented that the letter was still not a guarantee that these costs would count as Sparks’ share of the costs. Mr. Seidel stated that the Corps of Engineers does not guarantee anything--the “bean counting” happens when the project is completed. Council Member Carrigan pointed out that the costs of the flood project have already been incorporated into our sewer rates. Mr. Seidel confirmed that $5.41 per month of the sewer bill is dedicated to the flood project. Mr. Seidel noted that there are multiple benefits of the North Truckee Drain Realignment Project, including: lowering the flood pool by 9.5 inches in the industrial section and move the water out of the valley quicker [in the event of a flood]. Council Member Schmitt commented that he was not familiar with the company of HDR Engineering and asked where they were located. Mr. Seidel stated they are a national company and they have a Reno office, as well as an office in Folsom, California (which allows them to work closely with the Corps of Engineers in Sacramento). Council Member Schmitt expressed concern that the money we are spending was spent keeping local professionals employed. A representative of HDR stated that they have the local resources for most of the design work, but some of it will be done out of the Las Vegas office or the Folsom Office and they have subcontracted some of the work to local firms (CH2M; Bigbee; Kleinfelder, etc.). Council Member Schmitt stated that under the current economic conditions, he felt it was important to keep as much of this money in northern Nevada as possible. Council Member Schmitt also expressed concern that this was a non-bid contract because professional services cannot be bid per Nevada statutes. Therefore there was no real way of comparison and judging whether these costs are reasonable. He stated the cost of these engineering services were a very high percentage of the total cost of the project. He said people need to know this because this is taxpayer money. The HDR representative stated that he felt that their costs for the engineering and design work were a low percentage of the cost of the entire project (around 4.5%).


Page 8 of 19

Council Member Schmitt said his concern was creating jobs locally when we used public funds. Mr. Seidel emphasized that this type of work is awarded based on qualifications and the City did put out a Request for Qualifications for professional engineers. HDR was selected from this process to do the Phase I Feasibility Study. This contract award is basically a continuance of the work done in Phase I and he felt that the most economical choice was to continue to use HDR for Phase II the project. Mr. Seidel stated that HDR has listed local surveyors and engineers as subcontractors on this contract and the representative from HDR stated that most of the work will take place in northern Nevada. Council Member Ratti asked for confirmation that this project is being funded through the $5.41per month assessment on the sewer bill and that we do not have the option to use that money for anything other than advancing the flood project. Mr. Seidel stated this was correct. City Manager Carey emphasized that staff is following the Nevada Revised Statutes with regard to retaining HDR Engineering to do this work and that they are qualified to perform this work. He stated that staff has also followed the City’s purchasing requirements for obtaining professional services. He said the Council’s concern regarding employment of local vendors in these difficult economic times is an area where it would be helpful to have an agenda item to discuss purchasing impacts and Council policy. Mayor Martini noted that although this is not a public hearing item, there was a request to speak regarding this item and in the spirit of the open meeting law, he would allow comments at this time. Mr. Dick Mills, a property owner in the industrial area, spoke in support of the realignment of the North Truckee Drain, stating they have waited a long time for this project and he would like to see it go forward. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve a professional services agreement with HDR Engineering, Inc. for professional engineering services for Phase 2 of the North Truckee Drain Realignment project, design and permitting in the amount of $4,788,451 as recommended by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, NO. Motion carried.

6.4 Consideration and possible approval of an Interlocal Agreement with the

City of Reno and a Consultant Services Agreement with HDR for a TMWRF Third Party Operations and Maintenance Review, for an amount not to exceed $130,469.24, to be shared between the cities of Reno and Sparks with Sparks’ share being $65,234.62 (50%) (Time: 3:20:39 p.m.)

Public Works Director Wayne Seidel noted that the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility (TMWRF) is a unique, one-of-a-kind, state-of-the-art, nutrient removal plant. Because we have to meet the Tahoe-Truckee River Water Operating standards, we have to remove almost everything humans put into the water stream. HDR was selected through the RFP process. They have two experts on their staff on the east coast and all they do is review water treatment plant operations for efficiencies. Through an interlocal agreement, the City of Reno will participate in this review and reimburse the City of Sparks for 50% of the costs.


Page 9 of 19

A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Reno and a Consultant Services Agreement with HDR for a TMWRF Third Party Operations and Maintenance Review in an amount not to exceed $130,469.24. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.5 First Reading and possible discussion of Bill No. 2600, related to PCN08054;

an ordinance request from Washoe County Public Works and the United States Department of Agriculture - Bureau of Land Management to change the zoning from R1-40 (single family residential - 40,000 square feet minimum lot size) to PF (public facility) on a site approximately 17.29 acres in size generally located northeast of the intersection of Disc Drive and Pyramid Highway and west of the Sparks Galleria Planned Development, Sparks, NV (Time: 3:23:18 p.m.)

City Clerk Linda Patterson read Bill No. 2507 by title, an ordinance rezoning real property owned by the United States Department of Agriculture - Bureau of Land Management to change the zoning from R1-40 (single family residential - 40,000 square feet minimum lot size) to PF (public facility) on a site approximately 17.29 acres in size generally located northeast of the intersection of Disc Drive and Pyramid Highway and west of the Sparks Galleria Planned Development, Sparks, NV; and providing other matters properly relating thereto. Mayor Martini announced that the public hearing and second reading of this bill will be conducted at the regular City Council Meeting of January 26, 2009.

6.6 First Reading and possible discussion of Bill No. 2601, an Ordinance

amending Chapter 13 of the Sparks Municipal Code by updating outdated provisions pertaining to the operation, maintenance and administration of the City's sewer, storm water and effluent infrastructure systems, and other matters properly related thereto (Time: 3:24:19 p.m.)

City Clerk Linda Patterson read Bill No. 2507 by title, an ordinance amending Chapter 13 of the Sparks Municipal Code by updating outdated provisions pertaining to the operation, maintenance and administration of the City's sewer, storm water and effluent infrastructure systems, and other matters properly related thereto. Mayor Martini announced that the public hearing and second reading of this bill will be conducted at the regular City Council Meeting of January 26, 2009.

6.7 Consideration and possible approval of 2008-09 budget amendments as

recommended by the City Manager (Time: 3:28:20 p.m.) (This item was heard out of order.)

Finance Director Tom Minton stated staff is requesting an additional $2.5 million in budget cuts for the period of February 15 through June 30, 2009. These budget cuts entail a number of layoffs and salary reductions for a number of employees (on a voluntary basis). These budget cuts are necessary due to a number of things. Once again the consolidated tax (C-tax) revenues have declined--it is anticipated the overall decrease will be approximately 18% from the prior year, meaning revenues will be down about $4.2 million. In addition, the cuts are deeper than initially anticipated because we have cost increases next year for health insurance, PERS rates, etc. He said if these cuts are made, staff is of the opinion that we can maintain a 5% fund


Page 10 of 19

balance over the next three years (2009 through 2011), although these budget cuts mean we will also have to cut our service levels. Mr. Minton stated that the overall, year-to-year, actual spending is about 3.52% or $2.1 million in the General Fund for fiscal year 2009. If these cuts are made, we should be able to maintain the mandated fund balance of 5%. Mr. Minton noted the property tax revenues are coming in as forecast. Business license revenues are holding up at about 98% of prior year actuals. Our largest revenue loss is the sales tax slump. Year-to-date figures for Washoe County show auto sales are off 26% and we expect to finish the year around 30+%. Building materials are 20% down; eating and drinking, 20% down. These are all top sales tax revenue producers. Mr. Minton stated the revenue forecast includes a slight amount of growth. Property taxes are anticipated to be flat for fiscal year 2010; a 3% increase in sales taxes; and flat in franchise fees and business licenses. City Manager Shaun Carey stated these budget cuts are a continuation of steps the City has undertaken since the economy turned downward. We lowered our expenditures last year between the tentative and final versions by almost $1 million. In September we lowered spending by $1.6 million. On December 1, 2008, we lowered spending by an additional $2.5 million. The Council’s action today would yield a $2.7 million reduction. He said we have stayed ahead of a very unpredictable and severe economic downturn in northern Nevada. Mr. Carey stated these actions being taken today are increasingly difficult because we have had a series of cuts--$8 million in nine months is a tremendous change in services we are providing to the public. Mr. Carey stated that to ensure that the Council had the information regarding the impacts that these budget cuts make (cumulatively), he asked each department to attach a report on how things are changing in their departments. He said we are doing a tremendous amount of work with fewer resources and in each department we have relied on our management teams to look at how to best preserve our service to the community. We cannot maintain all our services; still meet our statutory obligations; and remain an organization that has fiscal stability. Mr. Carey stated it was with a heavy heart that we moved forward with 35 layoffs last week. It was very, very hard on those 35 members of our team and their families and he thanked those employees for their years of service to the City. He stated it is his hope that the remaining employees will continue in their dedication to providing services to the public--it may take longer, but he felt we were up to the challenge. Mr. Carey noted that the budget plan lays out what each department believes are the appropriate service cuts, but the Council is the ultimate decider of how to use our available resources. Council Member Carrigan stated that at the Retreat on December 1, 2008, the City Council directed staff to meet with the various bargaining units to talk about a 4% cut in pay in order to avoid the layoffs. He said he wanted to make sure that the public understood what happened at those meetings. Mr. Carey stated that staff contacted all the bargaining units, as well as those employees groups that are not represented by a union. We have received responses from some


Page 11 of 19

of the groups. The Executive, Mid-Management Professional/Technical, Confidential, and Deputy Police Chief groups all responded in the affirmative. We also heard from other groups that they were not in favor of these cuts--the Sparks Police Protective Association (SPPA) and the Local Operating Engineers No. 3 (OE3). In the case of the Fire Department, they have a contract, but they continue to be open to discussions with the City regarding this wage discussion, but were not able to open their contract for discussion on a direct pay cut. However, the employees in the Fire Department have been very much affected by these cuts--we have reduced the staffing at all our fire stations to three persons. We rely on all of our employees to use good management on the use of overtime and scheduling of employees. We have not found that the Fire Department has excessive overtime. With the reduction to 3-person staffing, approximately $400,000 in overtime is saved in the City budget and about $800,000 will be saved next year. Mr. Carey stated that staff was not able to achieve Council’s direction to get all of the units to agree to a 4% pay cut. He noted that since the December 1st workshop, staff has been working diligently to come up with budget cuts in excess of $2.5 million and the Council is being asked to approve an additional $2.5 million today. He stated he did not approach the bargaining groups for the additional $2.7 million in budget cuts that were needed. He stated that there is no certainty, in his opinion, that if we had achieved the $2.5 million through a 4% salary reduction that we would not have had layoffs. Mr. Carey stated he felt it was in the best interest of the City to continue to discuss wage reductions as a tool for future budget cuts, which may be coming if the economy does not stabilize. He stated that all northern Nevada governments are doing a Yeoman’s job of trying to pick a stable future. We are choosing to go beyond any other local government in projecting the sales tax reductions at 18.6%. We hope to do better than that, but this will provide stability as we go forward. Mr. Carey stated that Mr. Minton and all the Departments have carefully considered the budget decisions for next year, so that we can have an 18 month window of financial stability. Wage reductions may be a useful tool if we are confronted with additional shortfalls that could occur, despite our best planning efforts. Council Member Schmitt stated there were comments made earlier about the layoff process being unfair. He asked Mr. Carey to discuss the process of how the decision to cut a particular position was made. Mr. Carey stated he relied on the Department Heads to look very closely at the way we provide services and to find the reductions in services and employees that would yield the ability to maintain the best quality of services. He stated that in the Police Department we are currently understaffed by six officers and we have a need for an additional 46 officers. He stated that he relied on the Police Chief to look at the magnitude of the cuts and in his opinion it was not a good time to take further cuts in sworn personnel; therefore, he chose some civilian support positions. In doing so, he understood the impact it would have in keeping our officers on the street. This example applies to Parks and Recreation, Public Works and Community Development. In the opinion of the experts in those departments these employee cuts represent the best of a bad set of decisions that had to be made.


Page 12 of 19

Mr. Carey stated there has been no weight placed between employees by bargaining groups, nor would there ever be. Our system is designed to look at our budget and our services and produce outcomes. As an example of the impacts, our Public Works Department has made a tremendous effort to maintain services, even though their workforce has been severely reduced. Mr. Carey stated that any single decision must be considered in the context of all the services we provide and that is what the plan that is being presented to the Council today represents. Staff was asked to look at services and provide recommendations to make very severe cuts. Those cuts involved employees and much more in terms of delays in future services, etc. He said the decision that the Council is being asked to make is a heavy one--they are being asked to provide less response of government to citizens who expect it. I.e., graffiti being removed within 24 hours; closing both outdoor public swimming pools; and not providing public swimming at the Marina this summer. These are the types of severe cuts that the Parks and Recreation Director, Mr. Sherer, in looking at his department, felt were the best choices to make in a tough, budget cutting mode. Mr. Carey stated that the department directors were present at this meeting if the Council wished to question them regarding their recommendations. Council Member Schmitt stated he was sure that the department directors did not make any decisions to cut services lightly. He asked Mr. Minton if the recommended cuts would get us to June 30th (the end of the fiscal year) or would we be looking at additional cuts in March. Mr. Minton stated he thought this would get us to June 30th. The Economist are saying that things are in “free fall” and in the fourth quarter of 2008, the economy is predicted to contract 6% to 8% and they expect the same result for 2009. He said that we are in completely uncharted waters--there have been so many stimulus packages and so much money thrown at this problem, but most people will tell you that we don’t know what’s going to happen. All we really do know is that employment is going to lag… it will probably go over 9%, approach 10%, and employment only recovers at the end of a recession. So, you may not see those employment numbers recover until the end of 2009 or the first quarter of 2010. This is why staff has recommended severe revenue reductions and plan on the revenue numbers remaining flat for the next fiscal year. Council Member Schmitt stated that 2.6 million people lost their jobs last year and over 2 million of those were the last 120 days of the year. This is truly a tough situation. He stated that Parks and Recreation has had to reduce services by approximately 20%, but he was concerned about the recommended closing of the outdoor pools and no swimming at the Marina this summer. He was also concerned about personnel losses in other departments that would affect the City’s ability to respond to citizen complaints and concerns. City Manager Carey emphasized that reports were provided to the Council that looked at the individual impacts of each budget cut. Mr. Carey stated he is recommending all the cuts as a package, but if the Council provides additional direction regarding specific items, the management team to carry out those amendments to the best of their ability, in concert with keeping the Council informed on how the economy performs. Council Member Ratti commented that the impact statements for each cut have been extremely informative and she encouraged the public to read these statements if they had questions regarding a particular budget cut. She also commented that she was struck by how many people at the mid-management/professional/technical level chose to take voluntary reductions. She said


Page 13 of 19

that some of those reductions involved their car allowances. Mr. Carey confirmed that different mid-managers, looking at the cuts in their department, have reduced their car allowance to save positions and services within their departments. Mr. Carey emphasized that the car allowance benefit is reexamined every year to determine the necessity to the position. Ms. Ratti stated she felt that the City was being progressive in doing a pilot program to allow employees to work from home or from another area of the City. She said cities across the country have seen that this can save money, as long as that employee is being productive. She said this is “green” because people are not commuting. Ms. Ratti said she respected the ability of the Department Heads and Managers to look at their departments to decide what the cuts are. However, she also felt it was important to make sure that one category of employees is not bearing the brunt of the layoffs. She said because of this, she asked the Human Resources Department for a report on what categories of employees were getting laid off. The results were that the confidential employees are taking the biggest hit at a 27% reduction. The next level down is the mid-management, which has lost 19 percent of employees. Below that is the OE3 non-supervisory category at 17%. Ms. Ratti said it was important to have an element of fairness overlaying the decisions that go into each department and their ability to provide services. She asked Mr. Carey to explain why we have not seen any layoffs in the top level of management category. Mr. Carey discussed the City’s organizational chart and noted that one department head position was eliminated through reorganization after the previous City Clerk retired. This position was is now mid-management, because we must have this function by law. Mr. Carey stated there is a need for a span of control - the Fire Chief and the Police Chief are responsible for the proper delivery of public safety and they spend about 53% of all our revenues. He noted that the command structures for police and fire are very flat and we have also reengineered the public works department so that there are only about 15 general fund employees out of 170 public works employees. Mr. Carey continued to discuss the City’s organization, stating this City went through an unprecedented expansion and our Community Development Department increased staff to 84 persons to handle the work demand. These positions were heavily weighted toward mid-managers because the planners, engineers, etc. were all professionals. The recent cuts in the department were necessary because of the economic downturn and the cuts were largely born by the technical professional (mid-management) group. Mr. Carey stated we have two assistant city managers to deal with the span of control Community Development and Public Works are two dynamic divisions with two Redevelopment Agencies, housing programs, etc., and we have to make sure we have sufficient expertise and oversight for these programs. It is common in cities to have a director of administrative services--we use an assistant city manager to provide our internal service functions such as Human Resources, Risk Management, Emergency Management, Information Technology and other systems. We also need an Assistant City Manager to deal with collective bargaining agreements. The City is also part of a region of over 400,000 people and we work in concert with Reno and Washoe County on shared services such as the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) and the Economic Development Authority of Western Nevada (EDAWN). One Assistant City Manager heads a department, as well as acting as an Assistant City Manager, which allows us to


Page 14 of 19

be present and advance our regional, state, and federal programs. The other Assistant City Manager works on economic development, redevelopment, and public works issues, which are again, interrelated on a regional basis. We are the only City in Nevada that has two Redevelopment Agencies and they both have very challenging futures. Mr. Carey stated our Parks and Recreation Department is the envy of any similar department in the country because of what they have done with their management and employees. Their recovery of revenues is about twice the national average because they are providing innovative programs on a continuous basis. Mr. Carey stated that in considering the question of fairness [of the layoffs], our search for efficiency is so ingrained that across the board, there has not been a time in our City where we has had the resources to do the job correctly. We have asked so much of our departments up to this point. The cuts being made today will put a lot more burden on our Assistant City Managers and Department Heads in key areas. We will not have an Emergency Manager or a Risk Manager. We will not have a Redevelopment Planner or an Economic Development Manager. These services will now be provided by the Assistant City Managers. He emphasized that he is confident that the recommended layoffs are appropriate. Ms. Ratti said with a “pie” that has been getting smaller and smaller, the portion of the pie for Police and Fire has gotten a little bigger and Public Works, Community Development, and Parks and Recreation are receiving significantly less of the pie than they were a year ago. This is because the City Council prioritized public safety as first. So even though there have been cuts in public safety that are not particularly comfortable, in terms of how much pie is available, they are still getting a higher percentage of the pie than they were a year ago, when we started the budget reductions. Mr. Carey concurred with Ms. Ratti’s statement, stating that we will have tough challenges in the coming months in providing public safety, but he trusts that the Fire and Police Chiefs have made the best decisions for their staffing, given the circumstances. Ms. Ratti stated that she has faith that the Department Heads have done the best job that they can with regard to staffing, but there are some cuts she is not willing to support: one is the closing of the public pools and not staffing lifeguards for the Marina. She said there are things that are going to have long-term impacts on our City, such as maintaining our streets, but there are some short-term things that will have an immediate impact. When families are struggling for recreation for their children, they are not going to be able to afford to go to Wild Waters or other options and she felt it was important to keep the pools open and the Marina staffed. She said this is also a safety issue, because kids need to learn how to swim. Mr. Carey stated that it costs about $150,000 per year to operate all our swimming facilities. In the cuts that were recommended, the Parks and Recreation Director Stan Sherer believes he could reopen the two outdoor pools and provide lifeguards for the Marina with operating hours reduced to peak demand times for a cost of about $106,000. It would take $35,500 this fiscal year and the balance of the $106,000 would come from next fiscal year budget. He said if the Council voted to do so, staff would restore this cost to the budget and the facilities would be open, but at a reduced level of operation. Ms. Ratti asked if the reduced level of service would mean that there would be swimming lessons only at the two outdoor pools. Mr. Sherer responded that no, it would not be swimming


Page 15 of 19

lessons only, however, the hours for recreational swimming would be reduced and some of the contracted classes from the Alf Sorenson facility would be moved to Oppio Pool. Ms. Ratti stated that one of the four things that people discussed most with her during her campaigning for this most recent election was traffic calming. She stated in the public works cuts, we are loosing a single asset that has a significant amount of experience in that area. The second concern was neighborhood deterioration. We are cutting down our code enforcement division down to two persons and this will mean that we cannot respond to all code enforcement complaints. Her concern was that in the short-term we may be setting ourselves up for more expensive problems in the future with neighborhood blight, etc. The third concern was graffiti removal--we have halved our graffiti program. The forth concern was park safety--this goes along with the issue of closing the pools. If we close the pools, we have less activity in the parks and they become less safe. Ms. Ratti said that as a council member she did not feel it was fair of her to give staff a “wish list” of what she wanted put back in the budget without making some recommendations on how to fund these items. It means that we have to cut more some place else, or we have to find some income sources. She said she is recommending that the Council consider reducing or eliminating our car allowance and/or the Council considering a 4% pay cut. She said that a lot of the management stepped up and did this in order to save positions. She said she felt that the Council could step up and do the same. She emphasized that she had not discussed this with any of the other Council Members, so she did not know how they would feel about this recommendation. Ms. Ratti stated she has discussed with the City Manager and the Finance Director the need to maintain a 5% ending fund balance, but she believed at if we shifted back to 4.5% instead of 5%, we would be looking at $340,000 in available income to fund some of these short-term priorities. She stated that she is aware that this would set us up for long-term problems if the economy does not turn around, but she believed that loosing these services now would also cause long-term problems. Council Member Carrigan stated that the City is in the business of services, not providing a product. He noted that some of the Council Members have already taken a 4% cut in their salary. As a Council Member he did not want to get involved in which employees stay and which employees get laid off, however, it is really difficult when you are talking about someone’s job and which jobs are more important. He said he agreed that our summer swim program and the swimming at the Marina were important, especially for the at-risk kids. He suggested that delaying the opening of the pools two weeks after school gets out and closing the pools two weeks before school starts would provide service during the most concentrated months of pool/swimming use. Council Member Carrigan expressed concern regarding the cuts for ammunition for training in the Police Department. He said this could be a problem, because the officers needed to keep their skills sharp and if they get “rusty,” someone could get hurt. Council Member Carrigan stated he wanted to stay away from trying to micromanage who stays and who goes, but if we have to spend down the ending fund balance below 5%, he felt that the pools and ammunition would important enough to do so.


Page 16 of 19

Council Member Smith agreed regarding the need to keep the pools open. He asked if the reduced service hours would be satisfied by the time frame recommended by Council Member Carrigan (June 15th to August 15th), or would it mean fewer hours of operation during each day. Mr. Sherer stated the reduced hours would be daily. He then reviewed the specific hours of operation, open swimming and swim programs that would be scheduled at each pool. In response to questions from Council, Mr. Sherer stated that from a staff prospective, it is better to cut the daily hours the pool is open rather that shorten the number of days the pool is open so that we don’t loose our participant base. In response to further questions from Council Member Smith, Mr. Sherer confirmed that having swimming lessons at the outdoor pools would increase revenues by $40,000 collectively, and that the cost for lifeguards at the Marina did not include park rangers. Council Member Schmitt stated that while he was not in favor of reducing the ending fund balance, he felt it was extremely important to have someone assigned to respond to citizen complaints, now that the Citizen Services Coordinator position has been cut. Council Member Ratti commented that while coordination of citizen involvement was important, she felt that it was more important to be able to respond to complaints via code enforcement--providing the service rather than coordinating the services. She said the Council, in the past had made neighborhood appearance a priority and we are backsliding on this priority--even before we had a foreclosure crisis. Whether this means replacing a position or getting someone else assigned to this problem, and understanding the importance of the ending fund balance, she would support reducing the ending fund balance to support some critical services and leave it up to the Department Heads as to which positions need to continue these critical services. Council Member Salerno noted that travel and training had been reduced in some departments and asked if the Council’s travel and training had also been frozen. Mr. Carey stated that there is a recommendation that eliminates the Council’s travel budget. He stated that in December all employees were told that we would not be traveling out of state for conferences and conventions because of the budget situation, except in the cases of public safety, where it is part of the job. Mayor Martini commented that there has been a lot of good input from the Council. He stated that this is a serious situation and he agreed that the pools and the Marina should stay open. However, the more suggestions that are put forward and the more we want to keep, the less money we will have to spend. As far as spending down the ending fund balance, $340,000 does not sound like a lot, but if we had not been cautious in previous years about spending down the ending fund balance, we would be in worse shape than we are today. He stated that he felt we still needed to be cautious in spending down the ending fund balance. Mayor Martini thanked all the staff who have been working so hard to be proactive in the last two and a half years. Council Member Carrigan ask that the citizens understand that we are cutting services down to the bare bones and to have patience if we can’t get to something right away--we will try to get to it. Council Members Carrigan and Ratti both encouraged citizens to call them if they had problems they felt were not being addressed. Council Member Schmitt stated he would not be supporting the motion, because he felt that communication is the most important link [between government and citizens] and that we really needed someone to coordinate this communication [Citizen Services Coordinator].


Page 17 of 19

Council Member Smith agreed that we really did need this position, but he was going to support the motion. He pointed out that at any time the Council could go back and revisit the budget situation. Mr. Carey agreed, stating that the Council will shortly begin the budget planning for next year and the Council will have opportunity to make decisions, as needed. Council Member Ratti stated that the departments are coming up with strategies for providing services without the personnel they had before. Since the Citizen Services Coordinator is part of the City Manager’s office, she asked Mr. Carey how he was planning to address the issue of communication with the public. Mr. Carey stated that this challenge will fall to the Community Relations Manager and the Executive Assistant in his office. He said they will be slower and subject to lapses in communication, but the remaining people in his office will do their best to respond to citizen concerns. Council Member Ratti stated, for the record, that she was not pleased that she was unable to make a case that some services needed to be put back in the budget, but that she would support the motion, because we need to move forward. City Manager Carey stated that he notified the Code Enforcement Officer and the Citizen Services Coordinator of their layoff a week ago. He said if the Council had a desire for those two positions, then this is a good time to do that, because he could return those employees to the work force. It is more difficult to bring them back once they have left. He said if an amendment to the motion were to include restoring a Code Enforcement Officer and the Citizen Services Coordinator, staff would manage two of those outcomes in the ending fund balance and report those outcomes to the Council. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve additional 2008/2009 budget reductions as outlined in alternative one, as recommended by the City Manager, and to direct staff to keep our swimming pools and the Marina open at a cost of $106,000. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, NO. Motion carried.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: None 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items:

8.1 Public Hearing, PCN08055, review and possible action for Tentative and

Final Approval of an amendment to a Planned Development Handbook, from Spanish Springs Medical, LLC, to revise the section entitled “Signs” which would alter the sign criteria to allow for a maximum 20-foot tall freestanding sign for Parcel IV-E and other modifications related thereto, on a site approximately 5.33 acres in size in the NUD (New Urban District-Kiley Ranch South Planned Development) zoning district located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Los Altos Parkway and Ion Drive, Sparks, NV (Time: 3:24:45 p.m.) (This item was heard out of order.)

Senior Planner Tim Thompson noted that this was a request for an amendment to the Kiley Ranch South Planned Development Handbook; specifically related to the office park located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Ion Drive and Los Altos. This site is currently under


Page 18 of 19

construction, with one building completed and two more similar buildings to be completed in the future. Under the City’s current zoning code, the applicant is subject to the Professional Office standards for signs. This standard does not have an allowance for any kind of freestanding sign or sign that exceeds six feet in height. The applicant is requesting a single, 20 foot tall, sign (not to exceed 200 square feet of sign area) to be located on the northwest portion of the site (near the intersection). Mr. Thompson stated that given the location of the sign and the proximity of the development to residential areas, staff is recommending approval of this amendment--subject to the findings PD1 through PD21 as listed in the Planning Commission staff report. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed amendment. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Ratti, for Tentative and Final Approval of an amendment request to the Kiley Ranch South Planned Development Handbook associated with PCN08055, adopting findings PD1 through PD21 and the facts supporting these findings set forth in the staff report. Because the request includes final approval, the City Council does not require a bond at this time as stated in NRS 278A.490. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. Mayor Martini thanked the Council for doing an excellent job with something that is very difficult. He said that we are affected by the economy the same as other businesses in that if we don’t have revenues, we have to make cuts. GENERAL BUSINESS CONTINUED

6.8 Possible motion to adjourn to a Closed Door Session to review labor issues (Closed per NRS 288.220) (Time: 4:45:16 p.m.)

A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to adjourn to a closed door session after the Redevelopment Agency meeting to review labor issues. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

9. Comments:

9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 4:38:52 p.m.) City Manager Carey stated the City of Reno, Washoe County, and the Flood Control Staff have asked for a special joint meeting at 8:30 a.m. on January 26, 2009, to review the Flood Control Project and the need for the introduction of legislative measures that allow for the governance and for the project to be funded and built. Mr. Carey noted that a second issue was setting priorities for the State stimulus package. He said the Council approved submitting our issues, but did not set specific priorities. Reno and Washoe County have requested to prioritize all three of the stimulus package requests; however, he is reluctant to recommend this because it is difficult to establish priorities across jurisdictions because of how each issue affects each entity differently. After discussion, the Council consensus was that this issue was not ready for a meeting at this time.


Page 19 of 19

10. *Adjournment (Time: 4:45:52 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m. ______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________

City Clerk

>>>

Page 1 of 12

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 3:00 P.M. Monday, January 26, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:00:43 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:00 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:00:49 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt (left at 4:55 p.m.), City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Council Member Julia Ratti, ABSENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:01:01 p.m.) The invocation was given by Pastor Barb West of the Sparks Church of the Nazarene. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:02:24 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mr. George Fulkerson. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:02:53 p.m.) None. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:03:09 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. Mayor Martini requested that Item 4.1 was being pulled from the agenda, stating that Mr. Heuer was unable to attend this meeting due to illness. He said the item will be rescheduled for the meeting on February 9, 2009. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the agenda excluding Item 4.1. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, ABSENT. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: (Time: 3:04:12 p.m.) 3.1 Special Meeting of December 29, 2008, and Regular Meeting of January 12,

2009 A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of December 29, 2008, and Regular Meeting of January 12, 2009. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, ABSENT. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Commendation – Heuer Insurance Agency (Time: 3:04:57 p.m.) Mr. Heuer was unable to attend this meeting due to illness. The item will be rescheduled for the meeting on February 9, 2009.


Page 2 of 12

4.2 Presentation of Guardian of Freedom Memorial commemorative painting to City of Sparks (Time: 3:04:58 p.m.)

Mayor Martini invited Commander Bob Devon, the Chair of the Guardian of Freedom Memorial Foundation to make the presentation. Commander Devon introduced the co-chairs of the foundation, Col. George Fleck from the JRTC High School in Golden Valley and Col. Chuck Fulkerson, founder of the Veteran’s Guest House in Reno. Commander Devon thanked the anonymous donor for this painting and noted that this memorial was founded to recognize the veterans from Nevada who have lost their lives in the Iraq War. He then discussed the history of the project and symbolism of the painting, stating it all started with some high school students and their desire to remember those who lost their lives to war.

4.3 Presentation by Community Foundation of Western Nevada (Time: 3:11:17

p.m.) Ms. Jennifer Satry, the Chair of the Board of Trustees of the Community Foundation of Western Nevada, introduced Mr. Chris Askin, the President and CEO of the foundation and thanked the Council for the opportunity to inform them about their foundation and how they endeavor to serve the community of western Nevada by connecting people who care with causes that matter. Mr. Askin discussed how they were able to manage and grow funds to provide for various causes in the community. 5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:28:32 p.m.) Council Member Salerno questioned item 5.4, asking what building it was and who were the tenants of the building. Real Property Agent Dave Vill stated this is the Bill Simons building and there are two commercial tenants and four residential tenants in the building. Council Member Salerno asked for confirmation that this property had nothing to do with John Asquaga’s Nugget property. Mr. Vill confirmed that it did not. Mayor Martini noted that because of federal law, the council could not discuss the names and details of this relocation. Mr. Vill confirmed that under both federal and state property acquisition laws, we are required to provide confidentiality for the parties involved. Mr. Vill also explained the difference between confidentiality and secrecy and the guidelines that needed to be followed with regard to obtaining information regarding these transactions. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.4. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, ABSENT. Motion carried.

5.1 Report of Claims and Bills approved for payment and the appropriation transfers are for the period December 27, 2008, through January 7, 2009

An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.

5.2 Consideration and possible approval of a Consultant Services Agreement

with PBS&J for City of Sparks Basin Stormwater Master Planning-Phase I, for an amount not to exceed $475,000

An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel recommending the Council approve a consultant services agreement with PBS&J to perform a stormwater master planning analysis for approximately 5,500 acres of land area within the City of Sparks. This project will continue to


Page 3 of 12

develop storm drain master planning for the whole city. Tasks include evaluation of the capacity of the existing stormwater infrastructure, development of a stormwater management model for hydrologic and hydraulic analysis, identification of deficiencies, preparation of a comprehensive master plan and identification of future capital improvement projects. Appropriations are available for this project per a budget amendment request to the FY 08/09 Capital Improvement Program (CIP).

5.3 Consideration and possible approval of the purchase of Crafco Poly Flex II

through the City of Carson City’s award bid #304-048 for Road Crack Fill Materials with Construction Sealants and Supply, 1395 Greg Street, Suite #111, Sparks, NV 89431. The City of Sparks Public Works Department estimates spending approximately $50,000 for the remainder of FY 08/09

An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel recommending the Council approve the purchase of road crack fill material through a joinder bid with Carson City. Construction Sealants and Supply has a contract with Carson City that may be utilized by other government entities through November 6, 2009. Sparks is exercising the option of utilizing this contract for its crack fill material needs through the end of the contract term. Funds are budgeted and available for this purchase.

5.4 Consideration and possible approval of the payment of Business Relocation

and Moving Expense Benefits not to exceed the amount of $150,000 for the relocation of the individuals identified as Tenant One (1) from the property located at 1212 Victorian Avenue

An agenda item from Real Property Agent Dave Vill recommending the Council approve the payment of relocation expenses for one tenant at 1212 Victorian Avenue. As part of acquiring this building for the Sparks Town Center 2000 Amended Redevelopment Plan, the City is responsible for providing business relocation and moving expense benefits for the impacted tenants. The City took possession of the property and is now relocating tenants in anticipation of demolition of the structures. Funds for this expense are available from Victorian Square Room Tax fund.

6. General Business:

6.1 Consideration and possible acceptance of a grant from the Nell J. Redfield

Foundation of $31,150 for the Sparks Parks and Recreation Department to continue the Adapted Aquatics Program for adults with disabilities and the Playground Program for at-risk youth in 2009 (Time: 3:32:19 p.m.)

Recreation Superintendent Tracy Domingues explained that the City of Sparks has taken the lead in creating awareness and providing recreational programming for people with disabilities in the Truckee Meadows. The Adapted Aquatics program provides individual instruction for people with various disabilities and the Playground programs provides supervision, activities, and nutrition to at-risk children in first through sixth grades during the summer months. She noted that due to severe budget cuts, the City cannot fund these programs and that accepting this grant will allow both programs to continue in 2009. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to allow the Sparks Parks & Recreation Department to accept the grant from the Nell J. Redfield Foundation in the amount of $31,150 for the Sparks Parks and Recreation Department to


Page 4 of 12

continue the Adapted Aquatics and Playground Programs in 2009. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.2 Consideration and possible confirmation of appointments to the Airport Noise Advisory Panel, Advisory Committee for the disabled, and Sparks Planning Commission (Time: 3:39:17 p.m.)

City Manager Shaun Carey recommended that the Council confirm the appointments of Mayor Geno Martini as follows: Airport Noise Advisory Panel Reappoint Dr. Paul Davis and Larry Kleinworth, with one appointment remaining vacant

at this time. There remains one appointment that will not be filled at this time due to a lack of applicants.

Advisory Committee for the Disabled Reappoint Jim Casson to a term which will expire December 31, 2010 Reappoint Jeanette Ramirez to a term which will expire January 31, 2011 Sparks Planning Commission Reappoint Tom Lean and Jackie Peterson to terms that will expire on December 31, 2012 Appoint Justin Ivory to the term which will expire June 30, 2010 Council Member Carrigan stated that he felt because Mr. Ivory is the owner of a steel company there is the potential for a conflict of interest if he were to approve a project to which he would sell steel products. Therefore he would not support Mr. Ivory’s nomination. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to confirm the reappointments of Paul Davis and Larry Kleinworth to the Airport Noise Advisory Panel, Jim Casson and Jeanette Ramirez to the Advisory Committee for the Disabled. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, ABSENT. Motion carried. Mr. Carrigan stated that he has no issues with Tom Lean or Jackie Petersen for reappointment to the Planning Commission, but he did note a concern with Justin Ivory due to his ownership of A-1 Steel, which gives potential for a conflict of interest. Mr. Schmitt asked if we advertised this and the dates that it was advertised. Mayor Martini stated that it was advertised and there were two new applications and four applications that were eighteen months old, with no response back. Mr. Schmitt stated that he was told Mr. Ivory was the only applicant. Mr. Martini advised that all applications are kept on file for two years. Mr. Schmitt asked if this is Ms. Petersen’s third or fourth term and Mayor Martini explained that this is her third term and the rules allow this if there are no other applicants that qualify for the position. When the Mayor conducted his interviews, he received only one response and that applicant did not meet qualifications for the Planning Commission. Councilman Carrigan made a motion to reappoint Tom Lean and Jackie Petersen to the Sparks


Page 5 of 12

Planning Commission for a four year term, with a second to the motion made by Councilman Schmitt. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.3 Presentation, discussion and possible direction or approval of federal, state,

Nevada League of Cities and local legislative affairs issues (Time: 3:45:03 p.m.)

Government Affairs Manager Rob Joiner reviewed the Legislative report, which included updating of STAR Bonds information, franchise fees, tax issues and the losses due to caps. BDR 811would require council members to be elected from wards rather than at large as it is now. Consensus of the Council is that this BDR is not supported by the City Council. Councilman Schmitt requested that, when that BDR comes forward, an official vote of the Sparks City Council be taken, noting that there is already a process per our City Charter to discuss these items. Assembly speaker Buckley and Majority Leader Horsford met with the mayors last week. They have committed to meeting with the mayors once a month during the legislature. BDR 750 supports WC-3 and there was a meeting with planners from Washoe County, Regional Planning, City of Reno and City of Sparks. The Regional Planning Governing Board voted not to support this BDR because of water rights for approved but not built projects. Mr. Mellinger, Adam Mayberry and Rob Joiner met with the Reno-Sparks Chamber of Commerce regarding Sparks’ BDR (AB 98) on the room tax issue. The chamber has not yet formulated a position. He also reported that the Public Utilities Commission BDR regarding the sewer lateral location has taken another step. The Legislative Commission did request that the PUC withdraw the rule making procedure that was proposed, but they are not backing down from their position in requiring that local governments locate those laterals on a short-term basis. This issue will continue into this session. The City of Reno will promote two issues from Fairness in Reno Sparks Taxes (FIRST)-the unincorporated residents paying their fair share of municipal taxes and the in-lieu for C-tax issue but has been asked not to discuss C-tax at this session. On the Federal level, the economic stimulus bill is coming forward and the City of Sparks has aligned with the US Conference of Mayors, requesting those monies to come as quickly and as directly as possible. Councilman Schmitt asked if there is a target date to approve this bill. Mr. Joiner noted that it is a moving target.

6.4 Presentation, discussion and possible direction to staff on the Regional Flood Control Project and input on the Project Governance and Finance Models (Time: 2:30:37 p.m.)

Utility Manager JoAnn Meacham provided a presentation on the Regional Flood Control Project with the following points: �


Page 6 of 12

�� !��

• " #��#��

• $� ��

• ��

• �� %�� & ��

• �� '�#��

• (��)��'��*�& ��

• +�#��

• " �� *�, ��

" #��#��

�

��

• % �� *��#��- � ��& �� *��

��*��& ��.!!/��0�

• ��*�� 1�

• ��

• '��

• 2�� & ��

• �� *� �� 1��.34�� 5�� '�#��

'�� 0�

• �6�� 7�'�� . ��*�� 8��0�

• ��#��#�0�

• %*��& �� 9��%:��8��0��

• ,��%*��& ��& ��*��& & ��9��:0�

• �� 5& ��*�� *��*��0�

• (��*��& ��;�� *��*��%0�

$� ��


Page 7 of 12

�� 1�

�

� ��.� � <��

( 2)� =�.0��>� � =�-�-�� =�/! ��

<��?.� =�.0��>� � =�4�@�� =�/!.��

<��?�� =�.0��>�� =�A.A�� =�.0A�>�

��.1� � )�� =� � � �� 3�� 3 �� ;��

��0�

��1��% �& � �=@�� B=4�� .@�� C>�*�<��D��

�

�� %�� & ��& ;�� 4�

• +��>��> ��

• � ��<��

• +��;��;��*��

• � ��& ��#�� 3�� & �� & ��*��& ��*��

• ��& �E��2�*��*�

• �� ;��6'�*��8�7�� & ��*�� & & ��

��0�

�" ��'�#��

• �� *�� 0�

• " ��%��.�� 4�� & ��& �� & �� 2��

��& ��0�

• ��(��)��'��*�& ��0��

• %��#�� #�� '�#��

��0��

�� '�#�� 1�

• �� #�� *��& ��

��

• ��#��*� �� *� ��" '��

• �� *� �� & ��#��

�� 0��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


Page 8 of 12

+�#��

• �� *�*�#��& ��

�� *�� & � �� #�� '�#�� ;�� F � ��

�;��;��=� � �� 9.34�� 5�� #�� & :0�

• 2�;��*�>)'��*�*�� ;�� *��;�!�� !0�

• �� & �*�& ��& ��6��*��7��1�

• ,�� #�� & � �� #�� *�� *� �� *��

��9�� :0�

• �� #��& ��#�� 0��

• )�#�� & ��*�#��0��

• +�#�� & ��;��& & ��0�

• � �� ;��;��& & ��;��'��>��

��& & � �� *��#� ��1��

• ��;��*�#��*�;��;��& �� 1��

• , �� +" � ;�� *��& �� G �� +" �

;��;��

• >�� 6�� 7�

• ,& � �� *� �

• � �� >)' �� 1��

• ��)� ��('��@-A0�

• ��;��#��& �� & �� 0�

• >)'�� *� ��

�� ;��*��;��0�

• �� %�� & �� G %0�

• >)'� & �� ;�� #�� 6��& �� *�

�� 7�� +" �;��;�� 0�

• " �� ;�� *�#��1�

• ,��%*��& �� 9�� :1�

• >)'� & �� ;�� #�� 6��& �� *�

�� 07�

• ,��#�� #��0�

• +,) �H��#��

" �� *�, ��

• ,& �� ;�� #��*��1��

.0 ��& �� '�#��1��

• '�& �� ;��" '�

• '�� *� �� & ��#��

�� 0�

�0 ��#�� 9��& ��#��#��*�� :1��

• <�;�� 0�

• , ��& ��*�� 0�

A0� G ��.34�� 5�& �� & �I��G �� & ��

�� 9��*�� :0�

-0� ( ��)��'��*�& ��1� ��*�� & ��& ��

��& �� #�� 0��

@0� " �� 3�� *�#��*�;�� 1��

� �� & & �� & ��'�#��*��

� 2� �� *�� ;�� *��

��G � ��'�*��G ��& & � ��& ��#��*�� 0��


Page 9 of 12

� �� 5C ��;�I�

�0� )��& ��3��#��& �� ;�� & � � � ��

��0��

At the conclusion of her presentation, Ms. Meacham noted that there is a funding study underway to look at rates, tolls and charges. She responded to questions and concerns from the Council. A public hearing was opened and Mr. Dick Mills, owner of property within the flood area, stated that he wants to make sure that the Sparks City Council will make the decision on how his tax dollars are spent. He stated that he is against setting up a taxation board to make the decisions. This item will be brought to the Joint Councils meeting on February 9th for a vote. City Manager Carey stated that it might be helpful if the Council made a motion today to recommend a joint powers agreement model. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to carry forward with a joint powers agreement governance model as the City of Sparks’ preferred strategy to complete the Regional Flood Control Project, allowing this to be fully vetted before that decision is final. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.5 Consideration and possible approval of a Cooperative (Matching) Agreement

with the Nevada Department of Transportation for design, construction and maintenance of the I-80/Pyramid Way Interchange Landscaping Project in the amount of $680,360 to be shared with NDOT and the City of Sparks with Sparks’ share being $340,180 (50%) (Time: 4:51:35 p.m.)

Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb and Capital Projects Coordinator Ross Soderstrom noted that this agreement provides for Sparks to match 50% of the funds needed to take care of the landscaping issues along the northwest and northeast quadrants of the intersection of I-80 and Pyramid Way. He noted that the funding for Sparks’ portion of this project comes from the road fund (1401) which is comprised of our enterprise fees from gas and electric, right-of-way fees from the Truckee Meadows Water Authority, and fuel tax revenues. There is no general fund component in the funding for this project, so there would be no savings as far as salary, positions and personnel in the general fund. Council Member Carrigan noted there were no details in the staff report as to what the project would look like. He asked if this would be provided to the Council at a later date. Mr. Cobb noted that this project will be very similar to the NDOT project across from railroad building, more native to Nevada. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to the Cooperative Agreement with the NDOT for the I-80/Pyramid Way Interchange Landscaping Project in the amount of $680,360 to be shared with NDOT and the City of Sparks with Sparks’ share being $340,180 (50%). Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, ABSENT. Motion carried.


Page 10 of 12

6.6 Consideration and possible approval City Council 2009 appointments to City Boards and Commissions as proposed at the December 1, 2008, Retreat (Time: 4:54:27 p.m.)

City Clerk Linda Patterson reviewed the Council appointments to various boards and commissions as outlined in the staff report. She noted that at the December 16, 2008, Council Meeting the Mayor’s veto of these appointments was upheld and the Council unanimously approved a motion to extend the current assignments for boards and commissions for 30 days. She stated we are still waiting for an opinion from the Attorney General on the questions regarding the appointment to the RSCVA (Reno Sparks Convention and Visitor’s Authority). Ms. Patterson noted that in her research she found that Council Member Carrigan was correct when he said that most of the boards do not have to be reapproved; however, she did find some things that were different that originally presented. The Redevelopment Chair and Vice Chair appointments are two years, according to the Redevelopment rules and there are very few co-terminus boards and commissions--usually there is a specific term or the term is not specified at all. Ms. Patterson noted that when a council person is elected, even if they were an incumbent, their term begins all over again and all their boards and commissions need to be appointed/reappointed. The City Clerk’s office will create a database that will keep these dates in place and send reminders as is the current practice for citizen appointments to boards. Mayor Martini stated there are other issues to discuss regarding the Tourism & Marketing Committee. Ms. Patterson noted that according to current rules, the Chair and Vice Chair of the Redevelopment Agency are on the Tourism & Marketing Committee along with a Nevada Resort Association member. Councilmember Carrigan noted that this rule is something that the Council voted upon and it may be rescinded by vote, not resolution. Councilman Salerno stated that this committee is similar to the Fire Historical Preservation Committee, which has no terms. The City Manager noted that the Fire Historical Preservation Committee was actually created by the Fire Department to augment and gain support for the creation of their historical memorabilia in the Sparks Museum to honor fire service. There are no rules, but by invitation and this could be changed at their pleasure. Mayor Martini made the suggestion to approve these boards and commissions for 30 days again so that everyone is present for discussion. Councilmember Smith stated that he prefers to make a motion for the boards that are appropriate and wait on the RSCVA and Tourism & Marketing Committee on a future agenda. Mr. Adams noted that if the Council chooses to leave the RSCVA and TourMark Committee as they are, the status quo will remain. If it is reserved for a future date, the Council can then rescind the prior vote from May 2000 and go on from there, or maintain the May 2000 vote and adjust the board accordingly with Councilman Smith and Council woman Ratti. At that time, if the Council rescinds the prior vote, then a term will need to be set for that committee and it can be made retroactive. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve all of the December 1, 2008, appointments to Boards and Commissions with the exception of the RSCVA and TourMark Committee. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Members Ratti, Schmitt, ABSENT. Motion carried. Councilmember Salerno asked, if the Attorney General’s opinion comes back and upholds the


Page 11 of 12

co-terminus status or says the City Council can make its own rules, he would be grandfathered in because it was the terms he was appointed to the RSCVA, so there would be no need for that to come back to the Council because his term is up in 2010.

6.7 Consideration and possible approval of Bill No. 2603, an Ordinance of the City Council of Sparks, Nevada, providing for the issuance of its General Obligation (Limited Tax) Sewer Bond (Additionally secured by pledged revenues), Series 2009, in the maximum principal amount of $8,750,000; providing the form, terms, conditions, and covenants relating to the payment of said bond; providing for the levy and collection of annual general (Ad Valorem) taxes for the payment of the bond; additionally securing its payment by a pledge of net revenues derived from the operation of the sewer system of the City of which the financed project is a part; providing for adoption of the ordinance as if an emergency exists; and providing the effective date thereof (Time: 5:05:58 p.m.)

Finance Director Tom Minton asked that consideration of this bill be continued to the next council meeting because it requires four votes for passage. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to continue consideration of Bill No. 2603 until the Council meeting scheduled for February 9, 2009, due to the need for a 4/5 vote and the lack thereof present at this meeting. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Members Ratti, Schmitt, ABSENT. Motion carried.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: 7.1 Public Hearing, 2nd Reading, and possible approval of Bill No. 2601, an

Ordinance amending Chapter 13 of the Sparks Municipal Code by updating outdated provisions pertaining to the operation, maintenance and administration of the City’s sewer, storm water and effluent infrastructure systems, and other matters properly related thereto (Time: 5:07:14 p.m.)

Utility Manager JoAnn Meacham noted that this ordinance simply updates the outdated provisions in the code. She stated the code amendment enhances some definitions and updates language with regard to the sewer rebate program. She said is also matches up the titles to the program title at Washoe County and she emphasized that there was no change in the rates or revenue stream for the utility. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed ordinance. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Bill No. 2601 (Ordinance No. 2420) as presented by staff. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Members Ratti, Schmitt, ABSENT. Motion carried. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items:

8.1 Public Hearing, 2nd Reading, and possible approval of Bill No 2600, related to PCN08054; an ordinance request from Washoe County Public Works and the United States Department of Agriculture-Bureau of Land Management to change the zoning from R140 (single family residential-40,000 square feet


Page 12 of 12

minimum lot size) to PF (Public Facility) on a site approximately 17.29 acres in size generally located northeast of the intersection of Disc Drive and Pyramid Highway and west of the Sparks Galleria Planned Development, Sparks, NV (Time: 5:08:53 p.m.)

Senior Planner Tim Thompson explained that was a rezone request for 17.29 acres from R1-40 to Public Facility on a site located north of Disc Drive, south or Los Altos, east of the Pyramid Highway. He said this was a triangular piece of land located between Pyramid Highway and the Home Depot next to the Sparks Galleria development. He noted a Master Plan Amendment was processed several months ago that changed the land use designation to Public Facility and the applicant is asking for this zone change to conform with the Master Plan. He stated staff was able to make all the needed findings and is recommending approval. Council Member Carrigan asked if the concerns expressed by Home Depot had been addressed and taken care of. The Public Works Director for Washoe County Dan St. John, stated their commitment is to be a good neighbor and they have on-going communications with Home Depot, who was concerned that the planned building would not block the view of their sign from the Pyramid Highway. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed ordinance. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Bill No. 2600 (Ordinance No. 2419), the rezoning request associated with PCN08054, changing the zoning from R1-40 (single family residential-40,000 square feet minimum lot size) to PF (Public Facility) on a site approximately 17.29 acres in size, adopting findings Z1 through Z3 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Members Ratti, Schmitt, ABSENT. Motion carried.

9. Comments: 9.1*From the Council and City Manager (Time: 5:12:50 p.m.) City Manager Carey announced one vacancy on the Sparks Planning Commission and noted that applications would be accepted for this commission for the next 30 days or until the end of February. Mayor Martini also noted that there was one additional vacancy Airport Noise Advisory Panel and encouraged all interested parties to submit a community service application to the City Clerk’s Office. 10. *Adjournment (Time: 5:13:57 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:13 p.m. _______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________ City Clerk >>>

WASHOE COUNTY COMMISSION RENO CITY COUNCIL

SPARKS CITY COUNCIL WASHOE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES

JOINT MEETING

MONDAY 8:30 A.M. FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PRESENT:

John Breternitz, Washoe County Commissioner Bob Larkin, Washoe County Commissioner* Kitty Jung, Washoe County Commissioner

Robert A. Cashell, City of Reno, Mayor Dan Gustin, Reno City Councilmember

Jessica Sferrazza, Reno City Councilmember Sharon Zadra, Reno City Councilmember David Aiazzi, Reno City Councilmember*

Geno Martini, City of Sparks, Mayor

Mike Carrigan, Sparks City Councilmember Julia Ratti, Sparks City Councilmember

Ron Schmitt, Sparks City Councilmember Ron Smith, Sparks City Councilmember

Phil Salerno, Sparks City Councilmember

Scott Kelley, Washoe County School District Board of Trustees Member* Barbara McLaury, Washoe County School District Board of Trustees Member Estela LeVario Gutierrez, Washoe County School District Board of Trustees,

Vice President Ken Grein, Washoe County School District Board of Trustees Member

Nancy Hollinger, Washoe County School District Board of Trustees Member Dan Carne, Washoe County School District Board of Trustees Member

ABSENT:

David Humke, Washoe County Commissioner, Chairman Bonnie Weber, Washoe County Commissioner, Vice Chairperson

Dwight Dortch, Reno City Councilmember Barbara Clark, Washoe County School District Board of Trustees, President

The Commission, Board, and Councils convened at 8:33 a.m. in joint session in the Reno City Council Chamber, One East First Street, Reno, Nevada, with Mayor Cashell presiding. Also present were Washoe County Clerk Amy Harvey, Washoe County Manager Katy Simon, Washoe County Legal Counsel Melanie Foster, Reno City Clerk Lynette Jones, Reno Assistant City Manager Mary Hill, Reno Chief Deputy City

FEBRUARY 9, 2009 JOINT MEETING PAGE 1

Attorney Tracy Chase, Sparks City Clerk Linda Patterson, Sparks City Manager Shaun Carey, Sparks City Attorney Chet Adams, Washoe County School District (WCSD) Superintendant Paul Dugan, and WCSD Legal Counsel Randy Drake. Following the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of our Country, the Clerks called the roll for their respective entities, and the Commission, Councils, and Board conducted the following business: 09-112 AGENDA ITEM 4 Agenda Subject: “Approval of the agenda for the Reno and Sparks City Councils, the Washoe County School District and the Washoe County Commission Joint Meeting of February 9, 2009.” On motion by Councilmember Zadra, seconded by Councilmember Hascheff, which motion duly carried with Chairman Humke, Commissioners Weber and Larkin, Councilmembers Dortch and Aiazzi, Trustee Kelley, and President Clark absent, it was ordered that Agenda Item 4 be approved. Note: Washoe County did not have a quorum for this motion. There was no public comment on this item. 09-113 AGENDA ITEM 6 Agenda Subject: “Public Comment (three-minute time limit per person) – (Additional Public Comment on specific agenda items will be limited to three-minute time limit per person after each agenda item and must be related to the specific agenda item.) Comments to be addressed to the Chair of the meeting and to the Reno and Sparks City Councils, Washoe County School District, and the Washoe County Commission as a whole.” Sam Dehne commented on his appointment as an honorary California Superior Court Judge, his attendance at local government meetings, and his advice to local government that was ignored regarding the current economic situation. Shaun Griffin, Storey County Community Chest, Inc. Executive Director, requested the Storey County Community Center be included in the regional list of projects seeking federal stimulus funds. He said the environmental assessment was done and everything was ready to build. He noted just under a third of the required funds to build the facility were raised so far, while Storey County provided the land and paid for the permits and planning. He explained it would be a free public use facility where comprehensive health, dental, child care, and before and after school programs would be provided. It would include a technology center and a place for performing arts and to hold public gatherings for the residents of Storey County and northwest Nevada. He

PAGE 2 JOINT MEETING FEBRUARY 9, 2009

explained Storey County was including the Center in its list of projects requesting federal stimulus money, but he would appreciate any additional help. Public comment was closed. 09-114 AGENDA ITEM 5 Agenda Subject: “Approval of Minutes - November 17, 2008.” *8:50 a.m. Commissioner Larkin arrived at the meeting giving the County Commission a quorum. On motion by Councilmember Salerno, seconded by Mayor Martini, which motion duly carried with Chairman Humke and Commissioner Weber, Councilmembers Dortch and Aiazzi, Trustee Kelley, and President Clark absent, it was ordered that Agenda Item 5 be approved. There was no public comment on this item. 09-115 AGENDA ITEM 7 Agenda Subject: “Staff Report. Discussion and potential direction to staff regarding the selection of a preferred governance model for the Truckee River Flood Project and initiate any associated legislative changes required to implement it. (Washoe County)” Naomi Duerr, Truckee River Flood Management Project Director, conducted a PowerPoint presentation “Governance Models for the Truckee River Flood Project,” which was placed on file with the County Clerk. *8:45 a.m. Councilmember Aiazzi arrived at the meeting. During discussion on the Army Corps of Engineers’ requirements, Ms. Duerr reminded everyone that the Flood Project was a best fit solution designed to deal with 100 to 117 year floods. She noted there would always be a flood that would be larger than the Flood Project was built to handle. Ms. Duerr explained the Flood Project Coordinating Committee (FPCC) narrowed the choice of governance models to either a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) or a Regional Flood Control District. She advised Clark County used a Regional Flood Control District and it was designed the way Clark County wanted it because of a special provision in State statutes. She noted the statute was a broad brush for the remaining counties, which did not fit the Truckee River Flood Project. She indicated legislative changes would be needed because of that issue and because rates, tolls, and charges could not be enacted by Flood Control Districts. She also advised statute set up Washoe County’s funding mechanism as an ad valorem tax instead of being able to use a 1/4 sales


tax, which was Clark County’s funding mechanism. She said using an ad valorem tax for funding was not an option because the County had reached the cap. Ms. Duerr said all three entities endorsed the FPCC approach, but the City of Sparks indicated a preference for a JPA. She noted one key issue that came up during all of the discussions was the potential for exiting from the agreement. She stated the only way to terminate a Regional Flood Control District was to terminate the entire District, but terminating a JPA was not as clear. She noted the Truckee Meadows Water Authority (TMWA) Interlocal Agreement contained a clear exit strategy. She stated another issue was the need for statutory change and the likely supporters and opponents to that change. Ms. Duerr discussed the contents of the memo from the Flood Project’s legal team dated February 7, 2009, which was placed on file with the County Clerk. Ms. Duerr said whichever option was chosen, an Interlocal Agreement could be crafted to deal with any issues. She concluded the presentation by presenting the following recommendations: Select a Governance Model or at least register a preference, approve submittal of a bill draft, and support the bill draft through the legislative process. Commissioner Breternitz asked about the rationale behind the City of Sparks preferring a JPA. Shaun Carey, Sparks City Manager, said the JPA was a proven model based on the success of TMWA and it would allow for the crafting of an individual solution that would work best with the three entities’ current economic conditions. He said because the Sparks industrial area was heavily impacted by floods during the last 12 years, the City of Sparks wanted to make sure the City Council had an opportunity to consider the impact of any tolls, rates, and charges. He indicated the City of Sparks felt that structure would be best administered through a JPA. In response to Councilmember Aiazzi asking if there was an argument for using a Flood Control District, Greg Salter, Washoe County Deputy District Attorney, explained the Flood Control District’s advantage was it would be a separate entity and any liability that happened during the District’s construction or operation would be absorbed by that entity. He advised the participants in a JPA would remain individually liable if the JPA failed to make payments. He stated a District would also severely limit any legal challenges because the public would only have 30 days to challenge the establishment of the District and that statute of limitation did not exist within a JPA. Councilmember Aiazzi noted Ms. Duerr stated the local cost would be 35 percent. Ms. Duerr confirmed that was the standard national estimate, but that amount might be limited due to some activities undertaken by United States Senator Harry Reid and with the hope the Corps would approve the Project’s plan instead of the Corps’ plan. She advised the total cost was estimated to be $1.2 to $1.6 billion and the local share would be $400 to $500 million. Councilmember Aiazzi asked what the local share was projected to be when the sales tax passed. Ms. Duerr replied the local share was projected to be $200


million when the sales tax passed 10 years ago, but only eight of the 45 projects needed to complete the Flood Project were identified then. She said inflation usually doubled in eight years, so it would be around $400 million now and there was no doubt the cost had gone up. Councilmember Aiazzi asked if there was any idea what the public thought about the Flood Project now because a $200 million jump in 10 years was significant even counting for inflation. Ms. Duerr said some estimates were done on the cost to an average homeowner and an average business based on a 15-year time period so the people would understand the cost to them. She stated the numbers came in very low and close to the $5.41 that the residents of the City of Sparks already paid. It was felt if those residents accepted that rate, then the rest of the community would accept those rates also. Councilmember Aiazzi reminded everyone the community was not willing to pay for schools just six months ago. Councilmember Aiazzi questioned if a model that could impose its own rates, tolls, and charges should be chosen without going to the public. He indicated because of that, he was leaning towards going with a JPA so local government could keep an eye on it. He also did not know if those tolls could be enacted in the statute. Ms. Duerr explained as an example, TMWA charged a rate for water use and every so often a rate increase was required. She noted the increase would be driven by facilities costs and the TMWA Board had to determine if the proposed increase was reasonable using a process that included pubic hearings. She felt whichever model was chosen, a very similar process would be followed to provide a mechanism to establish reasonable rates the community could agree with. She noted the rate would not be considered a tax because it would be a rate based on a benefit or use. She advised even though the citizens would not vote on the rate, they would have an opportunity to register any concerns. In response to Councilmember Smith asking about what direction was being requested, Ms. Duerr replied authorizing language needed to be established in statute that would not commit to doing something but would authorize doing it. She stated moving forward with a bill draft request (BDR) would allow going forward with the model addressed in the BDR, but there would not be the authorizing language to do the other model. She clarified if the Flood Project went to the Legislature to amend all of the statutes, then anything could be done. She understood the FPCC preferred to go to the Legislature with one approach, make the changes, and then enter into an Interlocal Agreement to implement that approach. She thought the BDR language would be ready by the FPCC meeting this Friday, whichever model was chosen. Councilmember Schmitt felt going with a JPA and addressing all of the legal concerns would be a positive move because it could potentially benefit other agencies, such as TMWA. Mr. Salter said he would bring it up with the legal team. Commissioner Larkin noted the FPCC worked five years to get to this point. He agreed with Ms. Duerr that either the JPA or the Flood Control District should be chosen because they would fall under two different enabling pieces of legislation. He


said if two different channels for enabling legislation were taken to Carson City, they could fall under two different committees. He said the FPPC had been working with Nevada Assemblywoman Marilyn Kirkpatrick and her staff to navigate through the murky waters that occasionally occurred in Carson City. He noted the City of Sparks had taken the position to move forward with a JPA, which he personally favored because there was experience using a JPA with TMWA. He said while there was a good Flood District model in Las Vegas, he felt Washoe County should not move forward with the largest public works project in its history using a model no one locally had experience with. Commissioner Larkin recommended moving forward with the JPA model with the caveat that there were issues with the overall funding levels and with the Corps. In response to Councilmember Sferrazza asking about the amount of damages that occurred during the 1997 flood, Ms. Duerr replied that 10 years ago the damage was roughly $1 billion dollars in six counties and $700 million in Washoe County. She advised the 2005 damages were somewhat less than $100 million because the water did not top the levies everywhere, which caused less damage. Councilmember Sferrazza noted the amount spent on the damages for the 1997 flood would equal the amount being spent on the Flood Project if it happened today. Ms. Duerr advised it was estimated those same damages with today’s build out would be closer to $1.5 to $2 billion. Councilmember Sferrazza said she was leaning towards going with a JPA, but the problem was a JPA could not issue General Obligation (GO) bonds. She asked if that would be something that could be changed in the Legislature so it would allow one entity to issue the bonds. Ms. Duerr replied a JPA had the authority to issue revenue bonds, which have a higher cost of issuance and a higher interest rate. She said the consultants calculated if $50 million in revenue bonds were sold versus the same amount of GO bonds, the difference would be $6 million in costs and interest. She explained the JPA could sell bonds through a county bond bank, which was done in Clark County. She noted Washoe County also had a county bond bank, but a change would have to be made in the JPA to allow the county bond bank to issue securities for the type of flood control project anticipated. For the City of Sparks, on motion by Councilmember Carrigan, seconded by Councilmember Smith, it was ordered that the Truckee Meadows Flood Project move forward with the Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Governance Model. For Washoe County, on motion by Commissioner Larkin, seconded by Commissioner Jung with Chairman Humke and Commissioner Weber absent, it was ordered that the Truckee Meadows Flood Project move forward with the Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Governance Model. Councilmember Aiazzi commented two years ago the Legislature did not think TMWA should have been formed the way it was, and he asked if the Legislators had been asked which model they would prefer. He said he was willing to go with the


JPA, but what direction would be given to staff if the Legislators did not approve of the JPA. Councilmember Sferrazza said there was Legislative support for the JPA and Ms. Duerr had testified to that fact before the FPCC several times. For the City of Reno, on motion by Councilmember Aiazzi, seconded by Councilmember Gustin with Councilmember Dortch absent, it was ordered that the Truckee Meadows Flood Project move forward with the Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Governance Model. Councilmember Sferrazza said she wanted to clarify that everyone’s language included the GO bonds, the bank, and the liability issue. Ms. Duerr stated one issue she did not see a way to change was that a JPA would be a partnership and there would not be a way to indemnify the parties. She said when there was a partnership it would first go to the corporate and then to the partners, which a Flood District would stop. She said secondly she could not commit that the Legislature would agree to a change regarding the 30-day issue, but staff could certainly try. Amy Harvey, County Clerk, stated she heard the motion by the City of Reno but not a vote. Mayor Cashell asked if everyone had voted and they confirmed they had. 09-116 AGENDA ITEM 8 Agenda Subject: “Staff Report. Discussion and potential direction to staff regarding Shared Services. (Reno)” Mary Hill, Reno Assistant City Manager, provided a brief history of the creation, evolution, and actions of the Regional Shared Services Team (RSST) as outlined in the staff report dated February 9, 2009. Ms. Hill discussed the draft Interlocal Agreement for General Vehicle Maintenance and Resource Sharing, which was attached to the staff report. She noted the Agreement had been reviewed and approved the by Reno City Council and it would be agendized by Washoe County, the City of Sparks, and the Washoe County School District (WCSD) sometime in the next month. She explained a financial plan would be worked out once the Agreement was approved so reimbursements could be handled in a streamlined manner. Ms. Hill stated the staff report also contained a draft Interlocal Agreement for Park Maintenance. She explained the redistribution of the workforce would be a swap and that there would be no financial implications at all. She discussed the benefits that would be achieved in time, fuel savings and wear and tear on vehicles. She noted that Agreement would come before the Reno City Council on February 11, 2009 and would be circulated to the other entities in the next month.


Ms. Hill discussed the RSST’s major accomplishments as outlined in the staff report. In response to Trustee Grein noting the WCSD was not part of the discussions involving the sharing of services for parks, Ms. Hill indicated the WCSD’s involvement would be welcome. Trustee Grein felt in addition to sharing services for parks, there would also be an opportunity to share printing services and building inspections and maintenance. Ms. Hill replied a WCSD representative attended the meetings and she was sure it would be discussed. Mayor Cashell thought the goal was the elimination of services so there would be one mechanical shop and one parks department to do everything. He felt there was nothing being done to help reduce budgets. Ms. Hill replied those things that were done were things that could be done quickly, but the RSST was not through so there would be the opportunity for further exploration. Commissioner Breternitz asked how additional areas would be included in the process to ensure as many opportunities and options as possible were being looked at by the RSST. He agreed with Mayor Cashell that ultimately service organizations should be combined to increase efficiencies. Ms. Hill explained the RSST focused on six areas that could provide immediate savings and it was hoped to retire some of those six at some point and to move on to look at new areas. Commissioner Breternitz felt there should be some agreement by the affected entities before moving forward with looking at new ideas. He asked if that should be done by a representative of each entity or in a big forum such as this joint meeting, which he felt would be cumbersome from the discussion standpoint. Katy Simon, County Manager, indicated it was a great time for the RSST to receive further direction regarding the criteria the entities wanted the RSST to be looking at. She stated from the County’s perspective, it would be welcome to have an elected official from each agency provide direction on the criteria for bringing back new ideas. She noted the RSST had been operating under a consensus, but it might be time to bring forward non-consensus options. Councilmember Gustin advised an agenda item coming before the Reno City Council addressed the 10 to 12 percent in estimated savings for Parks and Urban Forestry achieved by changing the way things were currently being done. He said if looking at having one maintenance yard do one type of work and another yard do a different type of work would add to the savings and he would support doing that. Councilmember Sferrazza stated staff had done a good job but had done all they could. She felt it was time for a formalized committee of elected officials, working with staff, to consider looking at one issue, such as Community Development, for six months so some real changes could be made towards becoming more efficient. *9:38 a.m. Trustee Kelley arrived at the meeting.


In response to Trustee Gutierrez asking if there would be a cost analysis done within this process, Ms. Hill replied one would be done. 9:42 a.m. Mayor Cashell temporarily left the meeting and Mayor Martini assumed the gavel. Commissioner Jung said it would take political will by the elected officials to flesh this out. She felt a committee of elected officials could change how building inspections were handled today. She also felt police services could be looked at after some success with other areas and after it could be demonstrated to the public that it could be done in a way that was nonthreatening in terms of shared services. She stated staff had done a great job of putting everything on the table and tackling what they could. Mayor Martini felt this needed to start with some small successes first and move on from there. He commented the City of Sparks would be in dire straights if they were included in the Fire Contract along with the City of Reno and the County. He recommended being sure of what was being done before moving forward with any consolidation. 9:45 a.m. Mayor Cashell returned to the meeting and resumed the gavel. Councilmember Zadra suggested adding audit and the occupancy of each entity’s buildings to the list. She felt there could be openings in the government owned buildings that would allow another entity to stop renting from a private source. In response to the call for public comment, Buzz Harris, Associated General Contractors, said he was speaking on behalf of the Association and many other associations related to the area’s construction industry. He stated regarding bringing together the Building and Safety Departments, the people associated with the industry would like this to come together in the most efficient way possible. He discussed the regional building department approach used in Pike’s Peak, Colorado that was working very well. He felt with the staffing cuts happening across the board there could be cross training between the building departments, which would create a lot of efficiencies. He indicated the members of the association would like to help out in any way they could. Mayor Cashell closed public comment. Councilmember Aiazzi wondered if staff could be asked to move forward with looking at consolidating the Building Enterprises. He felt creating a subcommittee was not on today’s agenda and it would have to be put on a future agenda. Councilmember Sferrazza did not think an appointment could be made today, but maybe they could agree to head in that direction and let each jurisdiction appoint its members. Councilmember Aiazzi agreed and felt picking one thing off at a time would be a lot easier than using a scattered approach.


Councilmember Schmitt suggested using caution before jumping into the building concept, because he thought there were some legal issues with all three building enterprises having their own Enterprise Funds and having different scales. He felt there should be discussions with the legal departments about how those entities were different and how they could be combined instead of giving them direction to go ahead and combine them. Councilmember Aiazzi interjected the direction was not to combine all three building enterprises but to look at all of the issues involved in doing so. Councilmember Schmitt stated three to five years were spent looking at Parks and there were some recommendations on consolidating the warehouses, maintenance yards, and so forth. He felt because of the extreme amount of work already done that could be moved forward quicker. Commissioner Breternitz understood that certain things might appear to be shooting from the hip, and he certainly would not want to do that when talking about services that affected a lot of people and businesses in the community. He thought it would be important to come away from this meeting with something that would be considered a jump start, which he felt could be to simply agree to form a committee of elected officials, have the entities make their appointments to the committee, and then start holding discussions. For the County, Commissioner Breternitz made a motion that all entities engage in formulating a committee with one or two representatives from each of the elected boards. Commissioner Larkin seconded the motion. Mayor Cashell thought the County and City Managers should pick the three areas to focus on, come back before the Cities and County to then set up a committee. Commissioner Breternitz agreed there should be some dialogue with senior staff, but he wanted to get this committee idea on each entity’s next practical agenda so the entities could determine the committee’s members. Commissioner Breternitz amended the motion to include directing the County Manager to bring the structure for making committee appointments back to the Commission at the next practical Commission meeting. Commissioner Larkin agreed with the amendment. The motion carried unanimously 3-0 with Chairman Humke and Commissioner Weber absent. Councilmember Carrigan reminded everyone that the voters indicated year after year they did not want any consolidation of fire, police and governance, but everything else was pretty much on the table. He agreed there could be some legal issues regarding the Enterprise Funds. Councilmember Ratti felt a range of solutions including everything from cooperation to possible consolidation should be looked at, and she was not sure if there was any fiscal or any other meaningful analysis that indicated one solution was better than another. She thought each category of services would be very different regarding


what would work with each jurisdiction’s political environment and for the bottom line. She advised past experience working in human services showed bigger was not necessarily cheaper or better. She said if there were X number of clients to serve, X number of people were necessary to serve those clients, which should also be true regarding building inspections. If there were X number of buildings needing inspections, there had to be X number of people available. She felt possible savings at the management level should be investigated. Councilmember Salerno stated the last time the citizens in Sparks voiced their opinion about consolidation was just prior to the current budget problems and cutbacks. He had no idea where they stood now, but he felt they would probably be interested in having consolidation of certain services looked at. For the City of Sparks, on motion by Councilmember Carrigan, seconded by Councilmember Ratti, which motion duly carried, it was ordered that the City of Sparks direct the City Manager to bring the structure for making the committee appointments back to the City Council at the next practical City Council meeting. For the WCSD, on motion by Trustee Grein, seconded by Trustee Hollinger, which motion duly carried with President Clark absent, it was ordered that the committee appointments be brought back to WCSD at the next practical WCSD meeting. Councilmember Sferrazza commented it was felt no one would vote for the Animal Shelter consolidation when it was being considered. She said its passage received 60 percent of the vote, which was a consolidation of services and which she believed was supported by the citizens in the City of Sparks. She suggested picking one subject to focus on, which was how it was done for the Flood Control District. She explained legal and staff did their analysis, and then the subject was fleshed out. For the City of Reno, on motion by Councilmember Zadra, seconded by Councilmember Aiazzi, which motion duly carried with Councilmember Dortch absent, it was ordered that the City of Reno direct the City Manager to bring the structure for making the committee appointments back to the City Council at the next practical City Council meeting. Commissioner Larkin advised the staff reports needed to be accepted and acted upon as well, which was not done. Mayor Cashell replied that was absolutely correct. Commissioner Larkin requested the agreements be brought back to each governing body with more specificity because the agreements right now were not very specific. On motion by Commissioner Larkin, seconded by Commissioner Jung, which motion duly carried with Chairman Humke, Commissioner Weber, Councilmember Dortch, and President Clark absent, it was ordered that the staff report be accepted and its direction be agreed with for Agenda Item 8.


09-117 AGENDA ITEM 9 Agenda Subject: “Staff Report. Staff Report Discussion and potential direction to staff regarding the Economic Stimulus Package. (Washoe County)” Dave Childs, Assistant County Manager, noted United States Senator Harry Reid requested a prioritized regional list of projects, which was worked on by the staffs of the County, the Cities, the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC), the Washoe County School District (WCSD), the Reno-Sparks Convention and Visitors Authority (RSCVA) and the Truckee River Flood Management Project. Mr. Childs noted the Senate version of the federal stimulus package was somewhat different than the House version, which meant the kinds of projects that might get funded have changed and required staff to be flexible in putting together the list. He discussed the project categories that were likely to obtain federal funding and those that would not. He said the most promising projects were those that matched the federal criteria and were ready to go or, “shovel ready”. After discussion regarding the definition of “shovel ready,” Mr. Childs explained the federal government defined it as being ready to turn the dirt on a project, or some portion of a project, within 90 days after the President signed the legislation. Mayor Martini said projects could be “shovel ready” but federal funding could involve Environmental Impact Studies (EIS’s). Mr. Childs replied if EIS’s were required for a project, it would not be considered “shovel ready.” Mr. Childs said there was an effort to balance projects between the various types of trades to get the maximum amount of people in the Truckee Meadows back to work. He stated in the spirit of collaboration, the staff of the Cities of Reno and Sparks and the County all agreed schools needed to be built. Mr. Childs reminded everyone that this was just a list, which was an expression of need and availability. He discussed the Truckee Meadows Federal Stimulus List: “Most Promising Projects Identified in Each Category – February 2009.” He noted the most promising projects were highlighted in yellow and Storey County’s Community Center in Virginia City was on the list. He said the list contained the projects with the most promise, but they were not in priority order. He discussed which projects had the greatest potential for obtaining funding. He stated the RSCVA submitted its list after the regional priorities were established so the RSCVA’s projects were put at the end of the list. Mayor Cashell requested the Storey County Community Center in Virginia City get a yellow highlight. Councilmember Carrigan felt the first priority should be “shovel ready” projects, the second should be what would put the most people to work, and the third should meet the criteria in the federal stimulus package. He did not feel balancing the projects between the entities was important because people who worked in the City of Sparks did not live just in Sparks but throughout the County. He indicated his priority


would be to take a look at the revitalization of the older schools, which would be more important than the City of Sparks getting its due. Mr. Childs reiterated it was more about trying to balance the trades and that the entities that got the funding had the capacity to do the work. Maureen McKissick, City of Reno’s Grant and Fund Development Manager, said project ready evaluations would be presented to the Reno City Council on Wednesday and staff was asking for prioritization on what appeared to be in the Senate version of the bill. Commissioner Jung agreed the priorities should be if a project was “shovel ready” and if it would stimulate the area economically. She advised data showed the money that was put into the infrastructure of a metro area had a greater payoff economically than that going out into rural areas. She believed the intention of the package was to look at environmental design and energy savings as well as how the most trades could be put to work with the projects. Steve Driscoll, City of Sparks Assistant City Manager, advised that in addition to staff looking at the number of trades that would be involved during construction, they also look at the number of jobs that would be created in the area after construction was done. Councilmember Aiazzi asked if the Senate bill was being done by project, such as for energy. Mr. Childs replied he understood there would be some money for energy projects and, if the House and Senate versions were reconciled, there would be money for K-12 school facility rehabilitation, transit and highways, potentially some for fire stations, water, and waste water. He said the projects would be decided by the specific federal agency that received the funds. Councilmember Aiazzi said if $40 million was asked for and only $10 million was received that would be where consensus would end and that was why he would rather make decisions now on some of these things. He suggested taking the percentages and spreading it out over a group so there would not be an argument about the $10 million if it came in. He felt if the whole $50 million needed for the Meadowood Interchange did not come in, it would be more prudent to do the rehabilitation project in Sparks for $4 million. Councilmember Schmitt asked where the State would be involved in all of this. Mr. Childs said some federal funds automatically would go to the State, such as water and wastewater funds. He cautioned everyone not to put too much weight on this list because it did not drive where the funding would come from or go to, but was an indication of the priorities within the Truckee Meadows. Trustee Carne asked once the bill was signed, how long would the entities have to make the final decisions as a group. Mr. Childs stated for example, the highways area already had agreements regarding how the funding process worked and that process


would go forward. He said for energy projects there would be a call from the Nevada Department of Energy to submit the projects and it was agreed that if one of the entities got the entire amount of funding it would be good for the region. Trustee Carne asked how something got back to the entities to agree or disagree. Ms. McKissick replied it would depend upon the funding mechanism regarding what would come before the entities. She said the formula funding for the energy block grants would be distributed to each local jurisdiction and the money coming for education would come through the State. She said the congressional language would have to be looked at to see how the money would be distributed to see if it was formula or discretionary. Commissioner Jung said she asked staff to come up with a decision matrix that could be used as an algorithm so no politics would be involved, but staff did not have the time to do that because everything was still a moving target. She felt it would be premature to create that matrix until the area “gets what it gets” and it was determined what would be possible. She cited the RTC pavement index as an example of a decision matrix that took away any politics and that would be the best way to figure out what would provide the best economic, social, and environmental boost based on the language of the bill. In response to Councilmember Hascheff asking if the WCSD would quality for solar improvement funds, Ms. McKissick said that money would go to the Cities of Reno and Sparks and the County, but not to the WCSD. Councilmember Hascheff indicated that was something that should be a topic of conversation with the people back in Washington DC because the WCSD was an entity that could create jobs as well as anyone else and that also had needs. Mayor Cashell encouraged everyone to send an e-mail to the State’s delegation to encourage them to put education back into the bill. He said he reminded Senator Reid during a conference call that the region had 50-year old schools that needed money for revitalization. He said Senator Reid replied that was being worked on. PUBLIC COMMENT Councilmember Sferrazza advised there would be a Tax Committee meeting regarding going after local government funding tomorrow at 1:30 p.m. She also noted there would be a fire contract labor relations session coming up, and she felt the County Commissioners should be invited to attend that session since they were a party to the contract. Commissioner Jung commented the County was willing to work with the School District and the Cities of Reno and Sparks to make strategic cuts that would keep as many free programs as possible whole and to communicate the programs available throughout the area to the public.



Trustee Gutierrez introduced the new School Board Trustees, which included herself, Barbara McLaury, Ken Grein and Scott Kelley.

* * * * * * * * * * * 10:32 a.m. There being no further business to come before the Commission, the Board, and the Councils, on motion by Councilmember Aiazzi, seconded by Commissioner Jung, which motion duly carried, the meeting was adjourned. ATTEST: _____________________________ ___________________________ DAVID E. HUMKE, Chairman AMY HARVEY, County Clerk Washoe County Commission and Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners ATTEST: ___________________________ ______________________________ ROBERT A. CASHELL, Mayor LYNNETTE R. JONES, City Clerk City of Reno City of Reno ATTEST: ______________________________ _______________________________ GENO MARTINI, Mayor LINDA K. PATTERSON, City Clerk City of Sparks City of Sparks ATTEST: ____________________________________ _____________________________ ESTELA GUTIERREZ, Board of Trustees KEN GREIN, Clerk Vice President, Washoe County School District Washoe County School District Minutes Prepared by Jan Frazzetta, Washoe County Deputy Clerk

Page 1 of 14

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 3:00 P.M. Monday, February 9, 2009

City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:00:29 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:00 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:00:36 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, Acting City Attorney Shirle Eiting, PRESENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:00:53 p.m.) The invocation was given by Pastor Steve Bond of Summit Christian Church. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:03:55 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Acting City Attorney Shirle Eiting. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:04:22 p.m.) Mr. Robert Metz, founder and CEO of the American Sports Academy. He noted that they are planning to put an Olympic training center--a multi-sport facility with a high school and junior college--in the Reno area. He said they would like to get the support of the City Council in their efforts to lease 160 acres for this $500 million project. He stressed that this project is expected to generate a great deal of revenue for the community and he said the support of all the local governmental entities is vital in accomplishing this project. Council Member Schmitt asked where the 160 acres they wanted to lease was located. He said they are looking at the parcel next to the old golf driving range at the southwest corner of the URN Farm off McCarran. He said they are doing some innovative engineering to be able to raise this property out of the flood plain and they have been working closely with the Flood Management Committee to coordinate the project with the current flood protection project. Mayor Martini encouraged Mr. Metz to contact the City Manager to schedule a presentation to the Council regarding this project. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:10:28 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the agenda as outlined. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: 3.1 Regular Meeting of January 26, 2009 (Time: 3:11:03 p.m.)

Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting for February 9, 2009

Page 2 of 14

A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 26, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Commendation – Heuer Insurance Agency (Time: 3:11:37 p.m.) Mayor Martini read a Commendation recognizing Heuer Insurance Agency as one of the oldest businesses in the City of Sparks and commending them on the 80th anniversary of being in business. The proclamation was accepted by Mr. Larry Heuer and family.

4.2 Proclamation - National Wear Red Day (Time: 3:14:25 p.m.) Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming February 9, 2009, as National Wear Red Day in recognition of the fight against heart disease and the Go Red for Women call by the American Heart Association to increase awareness of heart disease--the leading cause of death for women. The proclamation was accepted by the Business Development Director for the Go Red for Women Campaign for the American Heart Association, Regina Lockwood.

5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:17:16 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.11. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

5.1 Report of Claims and Bills approved for payment and appropriation transfers for the period January 8, 2009 through January 21, 2009


5.2 Consideration and possible approval of an application for an Alcoholic

Beverage Package license for Nevada CVS Pharmacy, LLC dba CVS/Pharmacy #8792, located at 680 N. McCarran Blvd., Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Scott Richard Pasero

An agenda item from Police Chief John Dotson recommending the City Council approve an application for an alcoholic beverage package license for CVS/Pharmacy #8792. Mr. Pasero is the Store Manager at this location. The license will provide a $700.00 annual fee, plus $1.00 per $1,000.00 over $25,000.00 annually and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.

5.3 Consideration and possible approval of a contract for construction of the Sparks Boulevard Storm Drain Crossing Project with Q&D Construction in the amount of $37,412

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Andrew Hummel recommending the City Council approve a contract for construction. As part of the 2008 Sparks Boulevard reconstruction project, the Public Works Department requested that the Regional Transportation Commission include the installation of future storm drain pipes across the roadway just south of Springland Drive. These pipes were installed with the intent of relieving larger storm events that would impact the area. The pipes were installed strictly under the roadway and were left buried. In order to finish the


Page 3 of 14

project, a large storm drain inlet and pipe extensions need to be constructed. Quotes were requested from 9 local contractors, with Q&D Construction being the low respondent. Funds have been budgeted for this project.

5.4 Consideration and possible approval of payment for the repairs to Fire

Truck #375B by Hi-Tech E V S, Inc. of Oakdale, CA, to include body work and mechanical work in the amount of $28,503.48

An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel recommending the City Council approve payment for repairs to Fire Truck #375B. This truck was damaged in an accident. There are no facilities in the area that are equipped to make the needed repairs to this type of fire truck. In addition to the damage sustained during the accident, there were also mechanical problems which needed to be addressed. Funds are available for this repair.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of the Informal Quote for the 2008/2009 Orr Ditch Lining Project, CIP 9103 to Q&D Construction Co., in the amount of $64,798.80

An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending the City Council approve an informal quote for the 2008/2009 Orr Ditch Lining Project. This project is a continuation of the annual improvements to the existing ditches within the City and includes repairing leaking ditch sections and/or piping ditch sections to prevent damage to public structures and improve flow characteristics. The project is to include construction of 385 lineal feet of shotcrete/concrete lined ditch above Queen Way and North Truckee Lane. The contract requires that construction be completed between February 1, 2009 and March 14, 2009, while the seasonal irrigation operations of the Orr Ditch are off. Funds are available for this project.

5.6 Consideration and possible award of the Informal Quote for the Annual Fire

Hydrant Replacement Project, CIP 9041 to Petersen Construction, in the amount of $83,995

An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending the City Council approve an informal quote for the Annual Fire Hydrant Replacement Project. The program will remove and replace five existing street valves and 25 Rensselear fire hydrants installed in the 1950’s. These hydrants need to be replaced due to numerous problems with this type of hydrants and the lack of availability of repair parts and labor. Petersen Construction responded with the lowest quote for this work and funds are available in the CIP for this project.

5.7 Consideration and possible approval of a Reversion to Acreage Map for

property located at 1020 Pyramid Way for Holy Royal Martyrs of Russia Orthodox Church

An agenda item from City Surveyor Andy Fuller recommending the City Council approve a reversion to acreage map for 1020 Pyramid Way. The conversion is to eliminate interior lot lines which conflict with an existing building. With the reversion, the parcels will be in compliance with the 2006 International Building Code. The map has been checked and found to be in conformance and the appropriate fees have been paid. A performance bond is not required to be filed with the City Clerk as no public improvements are associated with this map.


Page 4 of 14

5.8 Consideration and possible approval to amend the Agreement for Sale of Treated Effluent with Sparks Galleria Investors, LLC (A-3400) to irrigate portions of Sparks Galleria. The Amendment shall decrease effluent minimum demand to 55 acre-feet per year and decrease maximum annual demand to 110 acre-feet per year

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas recommending the City Council approve an amendment to an agreement for the sale of treated effluent with Sparks Galleria Investors, LLC (A-3400). The amendment will decrease effluent minimum demand to 55 acre-feet per year and decrease the maximum annual demand to 110 acre-feet per year. Because of the decrease in minimum demand, there will be a 51% decrease in projected annual revenues from user fees. This modification will not impact the fees and rates the user is currently paying.

5.9 Consideration and possible approval to amend the Agreement for Sale of

Treated Effluent with Preserve at Galleria, LLC (A-3398) to irrigate portions of The Preserve at Galleria. The Amendment shall reduce effluent minimum demand to 13 acre-feet per year and increase maximum annual demand to 26 acre-feet per year

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas recommending the City Council approve an amendment to an agreement for the sale of treated effluent with the Preserve at Galleria, LLC (A-3398). The amendment will decrease effluent minimum demand to 13 acre-feet per year and increase the maximum annual demand to 26 acre-feet per year. Because of the decrease in minimum demand, there will be a 58% decrease in projected annual revenues from user fees. This modification will not impact the fees and rates the user is currently paying.


Treated Effluent with The Vineyard Investors, LLC (A-3128) to irrigate portions of The Vineyards Professional Campus. The Amendment shall reduce effluent minimum demand to 5 acre-feet per year and increase maximum annual demand to 10 acre-feet per year

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas recommending the City Council approve an amendment to an agreement for the sale of treated effluent with The Vineyard Investors, LLC (A-3128). The amendment will reduce effluent minimum demand to 5 acre-feet per year and increase the maximum annual demand to 10 acre-feet per year. Because of the decrease in minimum demand, there will be a 59% decrease in projected annual revenues from user fees. This modification will not impact the fees and rates the user is currently paying.


Treated Effluent with The Vineyard Investors, LLC (A-3399) to irrigate portions of The Vineyards. The Amendment shall reduce effluent minimum demand to 34 acre-feet per year and increase maximum annual demand to 68 acre-feet per year

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas recommending the City Council approve an amendment to an agreement for the sale of treated effluent with The Vineyard Investors, LLC (A-3399). The amendment will increase effluent minimum demand to 34 acre-feet per year and increase the maximum annual demand to 68 acre-feet per year. Because of the increase in minimum demand, there will be a 56% increase in projected annual revenues from user fees.


Page 5 of 14

This modification will no impact the fees and rates the user is currently paying.

6. General Business: 6.1 Presentation, discussion and possible direction or approval of Federal, State,

Nevada League of Cities and Local Legislative Affairs issues (Time: 3:18:11 p.m.)

Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll noted that the Legislative Session started last Monday and there has already been a lot of activity. He noted that Government Affairs Manager Rob Joiner had provided an update on Legislative activities to the Council on Saturday, via e-mail. Mr. Driscoll stated that staff is working on communicating with the Council in a timely manner due to the elimination of the middle of the month council meetings. He said the main concern that this the Council receives information on a weekly basis. Mr. Driscoll noted that we have not yet seen the final language on our Charter Bill Draft Request (BDR), which is a little concerning. He stated that today is the deadline for Legislative members to submit BDRs and next week is the deadline for the Committee Chairs to submit their BDRs. Council Member Schmitt asked what the policy was for advance notification of BDRs to the Council. Mr. Driscoll stated that the Legislature (supposedly) works under the open meeting law and the normal rules they work under is three days. Staff attempts to keep ahead of the three days by looking at the agendas for all the committees each morning and investigating any items that may affect Sparks. He said that if there is any issue that a Council Member is concerned about they should feel free to contact staff directly. Council Member Ratti shared a recent personal experience that may have legislative impact: she and her husband put in an offer on a bank-owned property, but the inspection indicated significant structural problems, so they did not purchase the home. However, in the process of making an offer on the home, they were asked to sign a form that waived the bank’s obligation to follow through on the typical disclosure process. Her concern was that when the next buyer comes along, the bank may not be obligated to disclose the structural flaws that they discovered during the inspection. She said she e-mailed a legislator who is working on the foreclosure issues in our state and she wanted to make the Council aware of her actions. Council Member Carrigan expressed concern regarding how our Legislative Team works and which Council Members are obligated to go to Carson City to address legislative issues. Mr. Driscoll noted that our Legislative Platform established the Legislative Team and the process by which we address issues; however, it is always the intention of staff to bring policy decisions to the Council, if possible.

6.2 Consideration and possible approval of naming an unnamed street – East Nugget Court (E Nugget Ct) (Time: 3:31:30 p.m.)

Community Development Director Neil Krutz noted that for purposes of public safety and ease of identification, the Street Naming Committee is proposing to name this unnamed portion of street to East Nugget Court.


Page 6 of 14

Council Member Schmitt asked who owned the street. A brief discussion was held, with the consensus being that Sparks owned the street, but no one was certain. Mr. Krutz stated that if the Council felt more comfortable knowing the ownership for certain before they approved this item, he asked that they continue the item for two weeks and he would provide a definite answer. Mr. Schmitt stated that he did not have a problem with who owned it, but he was concerned that if we were approving the name, then we should have the ownership. He asked that Mr. Krutz e-mail him the answer. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the naming of the unnamed street, designated by NDOT (Nevada Department of Transportation) as Frontage Road 82, to East Nugget Court (E. Nugget Ct.) as recommended by the Washoe County Regional Street Naming Committee, submitted by Staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.3 Consideration and possible approval of Bill No. 2603, an Ordinance of the City Council of Sparks, Nevada, providing for the issuance of its General Obligation (Limited Tax) Sewer Bond (Additionally secured by pledged revenues), Series 2009, in the maximum principal amount of $8,750,000; providing the form, terms, conditions, and covenants relating to the payment of said bond; providing for the levy and collection of annual general (Ad Valorem) taxes for the payment of the bond; additionally securing its payment by a pledge of net revenues derived from the operation of the sewer system of the City of which the financed project is a part; providing for adoption of the ordinance as if an emergency exists; and providing the effective date thereof (Time: 3:35:03 p.m.)

Finance Director Tom Minton noted that these bonds would be sold to the State Revolving Fund in order to construct the Spanish Springs Interceptor, Phase III. He said the money would be used to install approximately 13,000 linear feet of large diameter sanitary sewer pipe line. He said we are “clearing the way” so that when the project goes to bid, we can sign the loan contract to receive the funds from the State. Ms. Jennifer Stern, the consultant for the bonds, noted that the State Revolving Fund determines the interest rate that the City will get on the bonds at 66% of the index of 20 bonds that most recently published right before they enter into the loan contract with the City. If that were to occur today, it would be a rate of 3.27%. She stated this is a very favorable, low market, interest rate. Council Member Schmitt asked for confirmation that the term “general obligation bonds” in this case meant the obligation was exclusive to the sewer revenue funds and not a general obligation of the City of Sparks. Mr. Minton stated that it is a general obligation of the City of Sparks and that we are obligating any and all funds of the City to repay the bonds. Ms. Stern explained that this is the procedure to issue general obligations additionally secured by pledged revenues. Part of being able to do this is to show that our pledged revenue source is sufficient to pay the debt service on the bonds. This is the primary source of revenue, but in order to place the bonds with the State Revolving Fund, it is required (unless waived by the State Treasurer) the additional general obligation in order to get the favorable interest rate. If pledged revenues are insufficient


Page 7 of 14

to pay debt service, which is highly unlikely because one of the covenants in the bonds is that the City will keep rates and charges at a level to be able to pay the debt service on these bonds, as well as other outstanding sewer bonds. However, if this unlikely event were to occur, we would have to look to the general fund to make up the difference between pledged revenues and debt services. And, if that was insufficient, then we would have to levy a property tax. Mr. Schmitt stated that in light of the current economic conditions, if something happens and we can’t pay the bonds, we would have to start laying people off, because we have to pay the bonds first. He said he is very much against pledging any general obligation revenues, especially since we have such a healthy sewer fund and we recently raised our rates to cover this project. He said he would like to see us work with the State of Nevada to have the “general obligation” part waived. Council Member Carrigan asked for confirmation that the only way we can use the State Revolving Fund and get such a low rate of interest is to issue the bonds as general obligation bonds. He noted that the State rate is 3.27% and Ms. Stern noted that a revenue bond would be at least 1.5% more than the State rate, if not more. Council Member Salerno noted that this is the third phase of the project and that there was a fourth phase planned. He asked if the fourth phase would be the last phase of the interceptor project. City Manager Shaun Carey stated the third phase was going to be the last phase, but there are some changes occurring north of where this sewer line will end that may require us to have additional interceptors; however, those plans are still in the works and it depends upon the rate of construction. He emphasized that we included this project in our current rates, charges, and connection fees. Mr. Carey stated this is a critical project in cleaning up the ground water in Spanish Springs. The County is doing a turnover from septic tanks to sewer lines and this new construction requires new interceptor capacity. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve Bill No. 2603 (Ordinance No. 2421), an ordinance of the City Council of Sparks, Nevada, providing for the issuance of its General Obligation (Limited Tax) Sewer Bond (additionally secured by pledged revenues), Series 2009, in the maximum principal amount of $8,750,000. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, NO. Motion carried.

6.4 Consideration and possible approval of Resolution No. 3136, a resolution

pertaining to the issuance of Refunding Bonds by the City of Sparks, Nevada; authorizing the Finance Director to arrange for the sale of the Bonds; and providing other details in connection therewith (Time: 3:45:30 p.m.)

Finance Director Tom Minton stated this is a sale resolution, but it does not bind the City to pass this at this point. We are looking to refund, for cash savings, bonds that were done in 2007. Because interest rates have fallen, staff feels we can get the cash flow savings of 2.8% of refunded par, saving about $23,000 per year over the remaining eight year life of the bonds. He said we also intend to use the bonds as a vehicle to get a rating from Standard and Poor’s. The last bond rating that the City had is an A3; done in 1995. Staff feels it is reasonable that the City


Page 8 of 14

could be rated at an AA- (double A minus), putting us on par with the City of Reno and Washoe County. We have a ratings presentation scheduled with Standard and Poor’s on February 25th. Council Member Schmitt asked for clarification that these are general obligation bonds that have already been issued and we are simply refinancing them at a lower interest rate to save approximately $2,000 per month. Mr. Minton confirmed this statement. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Resolution No. 3136, a resolution pertaining to the issuance of Refunding Bonds by the City of Sparks, Nevada; authorizing the Finance Director to arrange for the sale of the Bonds; and providing other details in connection therewith. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.5 Performance review by the City Council of City Manager Shaun Carey to

consider the character, conduct, professional competence, or mental health of the City Manager and/or consideration and possible approval of an extension of Employment Agreement through 7/31/2010 (Time: 3:48:24 p.m.)

Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson stated the City Manager’s contract is being brought forward for consideration of renewal, as requested by the City Council. She said she solicited feedback on Mr. Carey’s job performance, but only received one e-mail, which stated they were very much in support of this item going to the Council for consideration. Ms. Syverson stated she received no other comments on Mr. Carey’s performance. Mayor Martini asked for questions or comments from the Council. Mayor Martini thanked Mr. Carey for his hard work and all the hours he puts in keeping the Council advised on current issues. Council Member Salerno noted that the last time Mr. Carey’s employment contract came up for renewal he was out of town. He said he is supporting the renewal of Mr. Carey’s contract because he feels the City Manager has excellent leadership skills and he communicates well with the Council. Council Member Smith thanked Mr. Carey for the work he does for the City of Sparks. He said government is changing every day and Shaun is on top of those changes. Council Member Ratti stated she felt that Mr. Carey was very supportive during her first months on the Council and she appreciated his efforts to keep her informed. Mayor Martini asked for clarification that approval of the employment contract did not include any raises. Mr. Carey confirmed that this was correct and he has not taken any increases in salary and, in fact, he has lowered his salary, commensurate with the current economic challenges, by four percent. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve an extension of City Manger Shaun Carey’s employment agreement through July 31, 2010. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Page 9 of 14

6.6 An Appeal under Section 3.050(3) of the Sparks City Charter regarding the removal of Tim Randolph as a Senior Assistant City Attorney (Closed Door Session may be held pursuant to NRS 241.030) (Time: 3:51:52 p.m.)

Mayor Martini noted that Mr. Carey received an e-mail at 11:14 a.m. today and explained that was why the Council did not receive the information prior to the meeting. He recommended that the Council adjourn to a closed door session. Mr. Carey confirmed that Special Counsel Alice Mercado would like to brief the Council prior to hearing the appeal. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to adjourn to a closed door session. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 3:53 p.m. and reconvened at 4:32 p.m. Mr. Carey noted that under Section 3.050(3) and appeal has been filed regarding the removal of Mr. Randolph as a Senior Assistant City Attorney. Mr. Carey then invited Mr. Randolph to come forward and address the Council regarding his appeal. Legal counsel for Mr. Randolph, Mark Mausert, stated that he had submitted a position statement regarding Mr. Randolph’s removal. He said that the position of the City Attorney is that the City Charter preempts the employment resolutions upon which his client relied for his employment. However, for purposes of this appeal, this was a moot point. The question is not what has control; the issue is whether his client had a good faith belief that he was protected by the age discrimination act. Once that question is answered, and there is only one way it can be answered--in the affirmative. The decision to terminate Mr. Randolph was made in material part because of his articulated opposition to what he perceived, in good faith, was going to be age discrimination, then that is retaliation. He noted that a transcript had been made of the conversation among Mr. Adams, Mr. Randolph, and Human Resources Technician Kathy Williams. He said a transcript only becomes necessary when people don’t tell the truth. Mr. Mausert stated his client did not want to engage in litigation against the City for age discrimination, he just wanted his job back. He said he felt the Council could do this by creating a special prosecutor position and that would be the end of this issue. Council Member Carrigan asked if they did create a special position, to whom would Mr. Randolph answer? Mr. Randolph said he could answer to the City Manager or directly to the City Council. Council Member Carrigan asked Mr. Randolph what his job would be as a special prosecutor. Mr. Randolph said that the least expensive way for the City to do this would be divide the work in a manner that would not cause the need for additional support staff. Council Member Carrigan asked if the money for this position would come out of the City Attorney’s budget and the City’s general fund. Mr. Randolph said the funds would come out of the City Attorney’s budget. Mr. Randolph stated that under the seniority provisions of the lay-off rules, if he were, in fact, laid-off, then he would have had the ability and right to “bump” the less senior attorneys all the way down the line.


Page 10 of 14

Council Member Carrigan noted that the position paper from Mr. Randolph’s attorney indicates that Mr. Randolph is claiming he was fired, but the City Council is being told that Mr. Randolph was laid-off. He asked for clarification from Mr. Randolph. Mr. Randolph stated that on December 30, 2009, Mr. Adams told him that he was going to fire Mr. Randolph, or Mr. Randolph could resign. Mr. Randolph stated he asked for a night to think about it and contacted an attorney who works in this area of law. When he came to work the next day, Mr. Adams told him that he wanted to “couch” this as a lay-off--he wanted to call it a lay-off. However, what Mr. Adams told him was that if he did not resign, he would fire him and give him bad references or no references and it would be better for Mr. Randolph to take a resignation. Then Mr. Adams said he was going to call Mr. Randolph’s termination a lay-off. Mr. Randolph said he then asked for this in writing, as anticipated under the employment resolution. Mr. Randolph said it took Mr. Adams nine days to get the lay-off memorandum to the Human Resources Department and to him. Mr. Randolph stated that it was his understanding that in the time between his request and when he received the termination letter, Mr. Adams met with counsel and now his termination is being called a lay-off. Mr. Randolph noted that in his conversation with Mr. Adams on December 31, 2008, was that the only performance issue with Mr. Randolph was that he said he would pursue his remedies if lay-off procedures were not followed. Mr. Randolph said Mr. Adams’ only concession to him was to phrase his termination as a lay-off. However, Mr. Randolph maintained, this was not a lay-off, because if it were, he would have the right to “bump” those attorney’s hired after him. Mr. Mausert clarified that in reading the transcript closely, what Mr. Adams was offering was a lay-off proposition and because his client did not accept the proposition, he was fired, regardless of the term being used. Council Member Carrigan said the Council was just briefed that Mr. Randolph was “laid-off” and Mr. Mausert was saying that Mr. Randolph was fired. Therefore he felt that the term being used was very important. Council Member Carrigan asked for clarification from Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson on which term was correct. Ms. Syverson stated that Mr. Adams notified Mr. Randolph in a letter that he was laid off. Mr. Randolph was adamant that he received the letter over a week after he was told on December 31, 2008, that his termination was effective that day. He maintained that he was fired, because if he had been laid off, he would have been allowed to bump one of the other attorneys. Council Member Carrigan stated he asked for Mr. Randolph’s employment contract, and was told he did not have one. He asked Mr. Randolph if he had ever had an employment contract or was he an at-will employee. Mr. Mr. Randolph stated he was hired in 1990 as an Assistant City Attorney under the management resolutions and he has been under those resolutions during the entire time of his employment. Council Member Carrigan stated it was his understanding that the Assistant City Attorney position was an at-will employee, according to our City Charter. Mr. Mausert stated the at-will analysis does not apply when referring to the federal statutory scheme like the age discrimination act. What does apply are the City’s employment resolutions which gave Mr. Randolph a good


Page 11 of 14

faith belief that he was protected, that he had “bumping” rights. The transcript indicates he was fired. He said the City Attorney has apparently attempted to couch Mr. Randolph’s termination in different terms after the fact. Mr. Mausert asserted that the transcript shows a termination, in material part, because Mr. Randolph voiced his opposition to impending age discrimination. That takes this out side the at-will analysis and put it into an age discrimination analysis. Federal law preempts, period. Council Member Carrigan stated that the issue is whether or not Assistant City Attorney positions fall under the at-will provisions of the City Charter. He noted that the last three times this issue was brought to the Council, the answer was that they are subject to the Charter and are at-will employees of the City Attorney. Council Member Carrigan stated that he believed the Charter also took precedence over any employment resolutions. Mr. Randolph stated that the Charter authorizes the City Council to set the compensation for the Assistant City Attorneys and that compensation is set forth in the resolution and includes things like sick leave, vacation leave, death benefits, paychecks, and seniority. He said he is asking that the Council now follow the compensation as set forth in the resolution. Council Member Smith stated that according to the information he received, Mr. Randolph was laid off and his job was eliminated and that he was not fired because of his performance. Mr. Mausert stated that was not what Mr. Adams told his client. Mr. Randolph, according to the transcript, was told he was being fired for performance. Mr. Randolph said the letter he received indicated he was laid off, and his position had been eliminated, but if that were so, then he would have the right to “bump” other people with less seniority. Mr. Randolph stated the resolution says that we will follow the civil service rules when there is a lack of funds or a lack of work and positions are eliminated. In the job family we are allowed to bump down. There are Assistant City Attorney I’s, II’s and Senior. There is no specific delineation in the job descriptions as to criminal, civil, etc. There is a Senior Assistant City Attorney that is a prosecutor, there is an Assistant City Attorney II that is still prosecuting, and there are Senior Assistant City Attorneys in various other parts of the City— one stationed at the Police Department. There are several Senior Assistant City Attorneys at City Hall that also do civil work. Council Member Smith asked Mr. Randolph what his definition of an “at-will” employee. Mr. Mausert stated it was an employee that could be fired for any reason. However, in this situation his client is covered by the resolutions which provide for bumping rights. He attempted to rely on those rights and articulated opposition to any conduct that would violate those bumping rights—in other words conduct in violation of the age discrimination statutes—and Mr. Adams came in and said that articulation of that position is a performance issue and you are fired. Then he tried to morph the firing into a lay-off. But the evidence will show that the letter, sent a week later, contradicts what Mr. Adams said in person. Therefore, a preponderance of the evidence shows the letter was a pretext—the letter was written to cover up what he said in person. Mr. Mausert said once these facts are plugged into the age discrimination analysis, the at-will analysis does not apply.


Page 12 of 14

Mr. Mausert stated the big question is whether or not his client was entitled to rely upon the resolutions. The resolutions themselves do not say they don’t apply to Assistant City Attorneys. If the resolutions apply, then for the purposes of this analysis, then Mr. Randolph was not an at-will employee, because he had bumping rights and this is a lay-off. He said even if we ignore the transcript of what Mr. Adams said, this is still age discrimination, because even without the direct evidence of age discrimination, his client had bumping rights, which were ignored. Council Member Smith asked Mr. Randolph to explain when he was being discriminated against. Mr. Randolph stated that when the City started talking about the financial difficulties, there were meetings with the Management, Professional/Technical groups and the employees were given the lay-off formulas and discussed the job bumping and gave out charts. This was done before his meeting with Mr. Adams on the 23rd. He said the employees were discussing the information and most of the people who attended the meeting were in favor of taking 4% cuts across the board to avoid lay-offs. Mr. Randolph said in his office they discussed the attorneys taking a 6.4% cutback so that the secretaries would not have to take a pay cut to meet the target and avoid layoffs and voted for that. He said people in his office talked about what was going to happen when the layoffs came. He said it was his belief that because the resolution says that they can’t be discharged without cause; any discipline or discharge has to be done in writing; and that the civil service rules will be used—that if positions were eliminated, we would have the right to bump people with less seniority. Mr. Randolph said that at his age, if he is laid-off without following these rules, this is age discrimination. Mr. Randolph then discussed a legal precedence which supported his argument. He said that because the cuts came at the most senior people in the department, this was cutting things that are protected under the law—seniority, benefits, etc.—and this is age discrimination. He said his thought was that if he were laid-off out of order, he would have to look at age discrimination. Additional discussion ensued regarding the basis of Mr. Randolph’s appeal. The consulting attorney for the City, Alice Mercado, stated that the question has been asked as to whether Mr. Randolph was fired or laid-off and whether the resolutions discussed at the mid-management meeting were applicable to him. Ms. Mercado stated that it was her understanding that Mr. Randolph is receiving severance in accordance with an employee who has been laid-off. If he was fired, he would not be receiving these benefits. Ms. Mercado stated it was also her belief that at the mid-management meeting, he was told by Human Resources Director Chris Syverson that the resolution did not apply to Mr. Randolph; Mr. Randolph was under the City Charter. Ms. Mercado stated the case cited by Mr. Mausert was a state case where a K-Mart employee was fired because they did not want to pay retirement benefits—this is not an age discrimination case. She said that to the extent that Mr. Randolph is claiming that because he relied on the resolutions, he should get the benefits; she noted that Mr. Randolph has been receiving lay-off benefits and he was told that he was not under the resolutions and that the City Charter did apply to him at an employee meeting. Council Member Schmitt asked Mr. Randolph directly if, at the employee meeting, at any time did any city employee say that the resolution did not apply to Assistant City Attorneys. Mr. Randolph replied, no. Ms. Syverson countered this no with a yes. Council Member Schmitt asked if this was documented. Ms. Syverson stated it was not documented, but there were


Page 13 of 14

witnesses. Council Member Schmitt asked if there were any other mid-management employees that could testify that Ms. Syverson’s version is what happened. Ms. Syverson response was not audible. Council Member Schmitt then asked for documentation regarding Mr. Randolph’s claim that he was terminated by Mr. Adams. Mr. Mausert referred to the typed transcript in the materials he provided to the Council Members. There were further arguments made by Mr. Mausert regarding whether Mr. Randolph was laid-off or fired. Mr. Schmitt also expressed concern that Mr. Randolph was not escorted when he removed his personal belongings from the office at the court, including his personal file cabinet. Council Member Ratti and Mr. Mausert held a discussion regarding whether Mr. Randolph was fired or laid-off. Council Member Carrigan commented that when the Assistant City Attorney positions were put into the resolution, he asked why this was being done and was told it was for pay purposes only. He said that counsel is saying we have to go by the resolution, but his understanding is that the resolution is for pay and benefits purposes only, and did not put them under the civil service regulations. Council Member Carrigan stated that in reading the transcript of the recorded conversation, he interpreted it as Mr. Adams laying off Mr. Randolph. Mr. Mausert responded that his interpretation was that Mr. Adams offered a lay off in lieu of begin fired. Mr. Mausert stated that with regard to subjective intent with regard to the resolutions, the subjective intent is irrelevant and his client was entitled to the black and white language of the resolutions as written. Mr. Mausert maintained that the Council could not negate the effect of the resolutions by articulating subjective intent six years down the road. Council Member Schmitt said that the City’s consulting attorney has told them that Mr. Randolph has been laid off and the resolutions do not apply to this position. Staff is saying that they communicated to Mr. Randolph that the resolutions did not apply to his position. Therefore the City Council has only one option—to deny the appeal—and he would like to make a motion to that affect. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to deny the appeal by Tim Randolph for removal from the postion of Senior Assistant City Attorney. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.7 Possible Action on an Appeal by Tim Randolph for removal from the

Position of Senior Assistant City Attorney (Time: 5:15:37 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to deny the appeal by Tim Randolph for removal from the position of Senior Assistant City Attorney. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: None.


Page 14 of 14

8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items: None.

9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 5:16:05 p.m.) Council Member Ratti congratulated Justice of the Peace Susan Deriso who was honored by the Nevada Judges of Limited Jurisdiction as their Judge of the Year. She said Susan does a great job representing the City of Sparks. 10. *Adjournment (Time: 5:16:55 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:16 p.m. _______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________ City Clerk >>>

Page 1 of 17

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 3:00 P.M. Monday, February 23, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 2:59:31 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Pro tempore Ron Schmitt at 2:59 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 2:59:35 p.m.) Mayor Pro tem Ron Schmitt, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Mayor Geno Martini, ABSENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:00:61 p.m.) The invocation was given by Pastor Paul Sheehan from the Queen Way Church of Christ. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:01:15 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Phillip Salerno. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:01:40 p.m.) Mr. Mike Fiannaca, Sparks Florist, spoke regarding the proposed median installation on the Pyramid Highway from “C” Street to Roberta Way. He said this would negatively impact his (and other) businesses located on “I” Street, because the proposed plan would be prevented from making a left turn from Pyramid onto “I” Street. Council Member Carrigan expressed concern that the business owners were not notified of the plan. Council Member Smith stated he did not feel the proposed medians would make much of an impact. Council Member Salerno stated he did not support the proposed changes because they would not slow down traffic and they would negatively impact access to the businesses on Pyramid. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:11:31 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. Mayor Pro tem Schmitt noted that item 5.7 needed to be pulled from the agenda. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: (Time: 3:12:18 p.m.) None.


Page 2 of 17

4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Proclamation – National Black History Month (Time: 3:12:21 p.m.) Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming February, 2009 as National Black History Month in recognition of the diversity of cultures and traditions of our region. The proclamation was accepted by Loni Feemster, President of the Reno/Sparks NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People).

4.2 Presentation on Reno/Sparks Convention & Visitors Authority Issues (Time: 3:19:25 p.m.)

Ms. Ellen Oppenheim, RSCVA (Reno/Sparks Convention & Visitors Authority) President/CEO gave a presentation to the City Council regarding the activities of the RSCVA during the past year as follows:

��

��

• ��

• �� • �� • �� ! ��

• �� ! ��"��

• # ��

• � �� $�� %�� &�o �� '�(��'��

o � ��

o ��

o ��

��

• � ��)�*++,�� -*. �� *++/0�� 1��

�� '��2��'�� 3�� '��

�� 0�

• $� �� )�*++,� %� �� ' ��'�/4. �� *++/0�� %� ��

�� ' ��'�� '��'�� '�� %��

� ��'�*++,��%��1��' �� 0�

�

��5��%��

6�� 1��*++/&�� ,7�

6�� 1��*++,&�� 78�

��8"--�$�� 9: �� *++*;&� � /<�

�

� �


Page 3 of 17

�

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

��

-0 �� )� �� '��

��%��3� �� 3� � �� %� �� ' �� 1�� =��

�� 0�

• �� &�

• �=�� >� �� '�� %�� '�� '� *+<3+,-� ��

��%�� '�-*�� %��'�� ?�*++,>+8�

Departmental Margins Budget Outlook Amount % Change

Reno-Sparks Convention Center (755,635) (861,519) (105,884) -14.0%National Bowling Stadium (1,582,060) (1,158,165) 423,895 26.8%

Reno Events Center 116,238 280,607 164,369 141.4%Reno-Sparks Livestock Events Center (478,221) (405,721) 72,500 15.2%

Golf (679,254) (367,756) 311,498 45.9%

Total Facilities (3,378,932) (2,512,554) 866,378 25.6%

Convention Sales (3,654,266) (2,294,672) 1,359,594 37.2%Marketing (5,159,735) (3,516,616) 1,643,119 31.8%Tourism (1,491,890) (973,053) 518,837 34.8%

Total Sales and Marketing (10,305,891) (6,784,341) 3,521,550 34.2%

General and Administration (3,271,289) (2,943,148) 328,141 10.0%

All Other (12,146,455) (11,787,121) 359,334 3.0%

Room Taxes 27,272,613 22,023,522 (5,249,091) -19.2%

Cumulative FY 08-09 Budget Adjustments as of January 01, 2009

FY 08-09 Increase (Decrease) in Profit

Room StatisticsBudget Outlook Amount % Change

Taxable Room Revenues 315,415,669 254,806,726 (60,608,943) -19.2%

Tax Collections 27,272,613 22,023,522 (5,249,091) -19.2%

Cash Occupied Rooms 3,890,231 3,388,804 (501,427) -12.9%

Cash Average Rate $81.08 $75.19 ($5.89) -7.3%

Cash Occupancy % 42.1% 36.9% (5.2) -12.4%

Total Occupancy % 67.4% 61.2% (6.2) -9.2%

Cumulative FY 08-09 Budget Adjustments as of January 01, 2009

FY 08-09 Increase (Decrease)

Description 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07

Taxable Room Revenue 259,152,710 278,885,741 282,432,859 261,966,526 256,216,294 272,451,686 275,567,203 288,393,206 303,333,318

Cash Occupied Rooms 4,773,411 5,017,909 4,926,899 4,610,335 4,534,515 4,645,504 4,383,328 4,315,188 4,092,489

Cash Average Rate $54.29 $55.58 $57.32 $56.82 $56.50 $58.65 $62.87 $66.83 $74.12

Actual


Page 4 of 17

• �� %�� 90�0� � ' �� 1� *+--3� ��%�� %�

# ��'��*+-<� ��*+-/3� ��! �� *+-+3�*+--3�*+-<�

��*+-7;�

• 6%�� %��%��

*0�5�� ! ��)�5�� %�� %�� %��1��'��>

� ��1�� 3�� 0�

o �� &�

� ��%��,7. ��'�� >� �� '�*473-*+��

� ��%�� %��1��'��

90�0�� %�� @ ��A��3�� 3�� '�� B 0��

5��%��A�� *++8;�

� ��

''��

<0 �� %�� >�6%�� 1�� %��

'�� 3��%� ��6 �� 9�6�;� ��"�� 1�� 1� ��

� �� %��>� ��0�

o �� &�

� 5� �� %�� 3� �� <�� 3� *

�� '�

�� %��=��# 5��

� ��2�� =�� %�� : �� )�! ��

C0 �''�� ! � �� >� ! � �� 9�� 1�� 1�� ' �� '�

��;� �� =�� ''��'�� '��0�

• �� &�o ��

o �� B ��

40 6%�� 5� ��%� �� >� �� 1�� %� �� '��

��>�� ' �� '� �� %�� 0�

o �� &��

� ��$��

� ��

� ��B �� @ ��

� �� %� ��

70 �� %� �� 6 �� )� �� '�� >� �� %��

� � �� 1�� %�� 3� �� 3� �� %� ��

�%� ��6 �� 9�6�;3��%��% �� 1�� 9�%��;� ��0�

o �� &�

� ��>� �� 6�� D/70*4E� ��'�� '� ?�+,>+83� �*04. ��

'�� %�� F� �� 840*. ��'�� *��6�� 0��

��!��"��

• G � �� %�� &�o �� :��3�*++,�

o ��(� �� %��

• G � �� %�� &�o ��&��%�� %��9� �� 3�� 3�� ;�

� 6 � �� 1�3�*++,�

o �! �&� �� 1�� %��9--�� 0�0�H �� ;�

� 6 � �� 1�3�*++,�

# ��$ ��

• 5��*++/�/8. ��'� ��%��>� �� '��

• �� F��%��

• 9�� '�� ;�� =�� C+. ��>� ��

�


Page 5 of 17

��%�� &��

• ��%�� %� ��%�� %�� '��

o ,+. �' %�� 1��'��%��

• # %� ��$ �� '�(�� %��

o ��'��

• �� 8+. ��'��%�� 1��$ ��

• � � �'� ��3� '�� =��3� �� % �� 1�� '��

� �� %��

• ��' �� %3�� 1��%�� '��

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�� '(�) ��

�� 9-4. ��'�� ;�� %��1�� %��1��0��

�� %�� %�� 1�� %��%�91��;��'�� 0��

• C4. ��'� �1 �� 1�� 3�*<. �� 1 �3�

��*+. ��

• ,7. �� %� �' %�� 1��'��3�1��*-. ��' %�� 1��• # ��8. � �� ' � ��

• # ��*8. �� %�� 1��

• ��1��)�C+. � �� 4+��783� ��*+. � ��C+��C8��• ! �� 3�'��3� �� 1�0�

�

�� *(�&��

# ��8. ��'�� 3�� %��1��1�� %��0�� 3�� %��

��'�� 0��

• ��'�(�� %�� %��

• $��'�� %��3�%��3��I '��• ?��&�4-. � ��<43��-*. � ��• # ��<+. � �� • �� %�&�<,. �� 3�*8. �$ ��3�-8. �� 7. ��'�� >��

• *8. � �� 3�7+. �� --. ��

• �� %��'��%�� 3�1�� 0��! ��

�� '�� 0�

&�� &��

• 5�� 3��'��>� �� %3�� '��

� ��

• ��1�� >� �� 1 ��'�� 3� ��%�� 3� ��

� � ��0�

*4.

7.-4.8.-<.

<*.

�� 7&��1 1��

�� 4&��%��

�� C&� ��>��

�� <&��

�� *&�:��

�� -&��


Page 6 of 17

• �� 3� �� >� �� 1� �� ' �� >�'�� '�� %�

��1��0��' �� 3��1� �� >�� 1�'��

'�� 1� �� 0�

• �� 1�� '��%�� %�1��

'��'�� 0�

• ��! �� '�� '�� 0�0�� '�� 1��

� �� %�� 0�

� �� "��

• J� ��'��2��@��

• 5� ��%��''��%��'�� =��

• �� '�� G ��

o ��0� �� ! � �� ! �� %�� %�� :��

�� %�

• �� %�� • �=��'�� 1�� '�! ��*++8�

�� +��

• ! �� %��''�� %��

• �� 1�� '�� 1��

• �� KB �� L�

o �� M�� ! ��0�

o # ''�� 1�� 1�� 0�

o � ��'��K��L� �� 0�

• �� KB ��6��L�

o �� 1�� 0�

o # ''�� 1�� 1��' ��0�

o � ��'��K��L� �� 0�

o �� 1�� 1�� '�� 0�

,--.�� &��

• ��@�� %�� : ��

• :�� F� � �� 2�� '�%� �� >� �� 1�� D-0-� � ��

�� =�� D-0,��

o �� 1�� D4�� %��1��

• � � � �� '��3�=�� 1��

# �� >��= � ��

• 5�� 2��

o �� ''�� ! ��

o ��'�� ''��%�� &�

� �� '�6��! ��

� �� ! ��

� ��

� ��

� ��"M��6��'�! ��

� ��"M��6��'��%��

� ��"M��6��'��

o �� %�� '� �� ''� �� ! �� '�� J��

��

o �� ''� � �� 665� �� 2�� %�� '�� "� ��

�%��

o �� ! ��

� �� @ ��9 �! �;�

o �� # �� ! � �� ''�

o N�� %� 1�� '�� '�� 1�� 9! �� ;� �� '� ��


Page 7 of 17

9� ��! ��;�

o �� %� �%�� %�� 3� ��

! � �� G ��%�� '��! ��

Ms. Oppenheim then responded to questions and concerns from council members. Council Member Smith asked for some local advertising for the wakeboard competition at the Marina, so local residents will be aware of the event.

5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:43:16 p.m.) Item 5.7 was pulled from the agenda. Item 5.13 was pulled for separate discussion and vote. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.6 and 5.8 through 5.12. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

5.1 Report of Claims and Bills approved for payment and appropriation

transfers for the period January 22, 2009 through February 4, 2009 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.

5.2 Consideration and possible approval of an application for an On Premises

Alcoholic Beverage license for No Dirt, L.L.C. dba Grampy’s, located at 222 Los Altos Pkwy., Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Christopher Frank Somers

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for an On Premises Alcoholic Beverage License for Grampy’s. Mr. Somers has two other licenses for other Grampy’s locations in Sparks. The license will provide a $1,000.00 annual fee plus $1.00 per $1,000.00 over $50,000.00 annually and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.


for Castillo’s Bakery & Restaurant, located at 1125 Rock Blvd., Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Jose Luis Castillo

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for Cabaret License for Castillo’s Bakery & Restaurant. Mr. Castillo is upgrading his on current premises beer license to a cabaret license. The license will provide a $700.00 annual fee plus $1.00 per $1,000.00 over $25,000.00 annually and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.


for No Dirt, L.L.C. dba Grampy’s, located at 222 Los Altos Pkwy., Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Christopher Frank Somers

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for a Gaming License for Grampy’s. The license will provide a $1,800.00 annual fee for fifteen multi-denominational upright slot machines. The license is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.


Page 8 of 17

5.5 Consideration and possible acceptance of a Justice Assistance Grant in the amount of $15,294

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council accept a grant for the Sparks Police Department. The department intends to use the money to provide training and purchase technology/equipment that would not be possible without the use of grant funds.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval of a First Amendment to the

Independent Contractors Agreement (A-3667) with Michael Chapman, Attorney at Law to increase compensation by an amount not to exceed $50,000 for legal services in the furtherance of the Victorian Square Development Plan

An agenda item from Real Property Agent David Vill recommending the City Council approve an amendment to an existing contract for legal services relating to the Victorian Square Development Plan. The Chapman law firm is providing legal services for an eminent domain action. While the City has been successful in the District Court on this matter, the City still requires the services of the Chapman firm to conclude the litigation for acquisition of 1212 Victorian Avenue. This includes establishing compensation for the property owner and gaining legal title to the property for the City. Funds are budgeted and available for this expense. This item was removed from the agenda:

5.7 Consideration and possible approval of a the purchase of two Columbia Cascade TimberForm play structures for Rock Park White Water Project, CIP 9047, to Park Pacific in the amount of $61,255

An agenda item from Parks and Recreation Director Stan Sherer recommending the City Council approve the purchase of play structures for the Rock Park as part of the White Water Project. Staff has determined that with the new white water feature within the park, there is a deficiency of play structures at the park. These play structures will be installed within the concrete curb provided during the construction of the park and provide an activity for young citizens. Funds are available due to two current projects that are coming in under budget.

5.8 Consideration and possible approval the Local Public Agency agreement

between the State of Nevada, acting by and through its Department of Transportation and the City of Sparks for the West End Prater Way Phase III Streetscape Project

An agenda item from Deputy Public Works Director Pete Etchart recommending the City Council approve an agreement for improvements to the west end of Prater Way on the north side from View Street to 21st Street. This agreement will allow the State of Nevada to reimburse the City in the amount of $650,000. The total cost of the project is $1,385,000. Utilizing federal and local funding, the project includes accessibility improvement, sidewalks, landscaping, lighting, and undergrounding of the existing power lines.

5.9 Consideration and possible approval of Change Order #1 for additional

concrete and electrical facilities on the Rock Park Whitewater Park Phase 2 Project, Contract Number C-1081, with Petersen Construction in the amount of $82,209.13 for a final contract amount of $530,657.13

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Andrew Hummel recommending the City Council approve


Page 9 of 17

a change order for several construction changes request by the City Parks Department to increase the useable space of the park and to provide updated lighting and electrical systems for the park. Funds are available for this additional work.

5.10 Consideration and possible approval of Bid #08/09-00208/09-013, an initial

six month contract with the possibility of nine (9), six-month extensions to Sierra Chemical Co. for the annual amount of $222,075 to supply dewatering and Sodium Bisulfite to the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility

An agenda item from Operations Superintendent Starlin Jones recommending the City Council approve a contract to supply dewatering and sodium bisulfate to TMWRF (Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility). Sodium bisulfate is used to eliminate any residual chlorine in the final effluent that is conveyed into Steamboat Creek and is required by the City’s federal discharge permit. A more frequent renewal of the contract will allow the vendor to raise or lower the price adjustment to the raw materials market.

5.11 Consideration and possible approval of recommendation to refund permit

fees to Galleria Station, LLC for permits A0600348-A0600352, A0600362, A0600364, & A0600365 in the amount of $189,880

An agenda item from Community Development Director Neil Krutz recommending the City Council approve the refund of permit fees for construction of eight townhomes in the second phase of Casoleil subdivision which was anticipated, but will not be taking place due to the current economic market. This refund requests a 100% refund of the NSSOI and sewer fees, which were paid in cash. NSSOI Flood Payments and NSSOI Park payments will be credited back to the respective trust accounts and RTC credits will be reversed through RTC; however, no other permit fees are eligible for refund.

5.12 Consideration and possible approval of recommendation to refund permit fees to Reynen & Bardis Communities for permits A0506213, A0506208, A0505941, A0505947, A0505945, A0505951, A0505946, A0505944, & A0505939 in the amount of $38,043

An agenda item from Community Development Director Neil Krutz recommending the City Council approve the refund of permit fees for construction of nine single family residences in the Galaxy subdivision which was anticipated, but will not be taking place due to the current economic market. This refund represents the return of the construction tax for park district 3 and sewer connection fees at 100%. NSSOI flood payments will be credited back to the respective trust accounts and RTC credits will be reversed through RTC. No other permit fees are eligible for refund. 5.13 Consideration and possible approval of a professional consulting services contract to Hershenow and Klippenstein Architects, for Architectural and Engineering design services to add solar panels to the Larry D. Johnson Community Center, CIP 9031, in the amount of $44,000 (Time: 3:44:20 p.m.) An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending the City Council approve a contract to add solar panels to the roof of the Larry D. Johnson Community Center. These new solar panels will supply approximately one third of the energy needs of the building. This clean energy reduces the effects on the environment while reducing the City’s energy costs.


Page 10 of 17

Funding is available for this project. Council Member Smith asked about the cost of the actual solar panels. Public Works Director Wayne Seidel stated that we have received a grant of about $250,000 for this project and he did not think the cost of the project would exceed the grant amount; however, he would verify and let Mr. Smith know construction and materials costs for the project. Council Member Smith said he wanted to see the entire project, not just the design part. A suggestion was made to continue this item to the next meeting. A motion was made by Council Member Smith and seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to bring this item back to the Council for consideration at the next meeting, with staff to provide additional details on project costs. Council Member Ratti noted that energy projects were a high priority on the list of projects for President Obama’s economic stimulus package money and therefore, there might be a timing issue if approval is delayed. Mr. Seidel noted that we have had the grant money for a while and it was originally going to be used for the design and expansion of the community center. However, in doing an analysis, the community center is eligible for a solar type project. City Planner Armando Ornelas stated he just spoke with Deputy Public Works Director Pete Etchart, and the total cost of the project is anticipated to be between $450,000 and $500,000. Of that, $180,000 would be covered by a rebate program from NV Energy (formerly Sierra Pacific Power Company). He stated that $44,000 is about 10% of the capital costs of the project and it is not out of line for typical design of a project. Mr. Ornelas then explained how the energy rebate program works. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve a professional consulting services contract to Hershenow and Klippenstein Architects, for Architectural and Engineering design services to add solar panels to the Larry D. Johnson Community Center. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


6.1 Presentation, discussion and possible direction or approval of Federal, State,


Government Affairs Analyst Kathy Clewett noted that Government Affairs Manager Rob Joiner was in Washington, DC (on his own “dime”), presenting our Fiscal Year 2010 appropriation requests. She stated staff also met with Senator Dean Heller when he was in town last week and presented our appropriation requests to him. She said he was pleased to see the Larry D. Johnson Community Center and the water treatment plant projects on the list.


Page 11 of 17

Ms. Clewett stated staff has also had discussions with the Reed High Band Director Duane Hollenbeck, regarding taking approximately 50 students from various high schools to visit our sister city, Longford, Ireland. Ms. Clewett said she has spoken with the County Manager in Ireland, Dan Rooney, and they are working on finding places for the students and chaperones to stay. Mr. Hollenbeck will present this project to the Marketing and Tourism Committee this week. Ms. Clewett stated the City’s charter BDR still has not been presented this session, so far. Senator Washington has reported that he is hoping it will come out this week. AB98, the Sparks room tax bill is expected to be heard in the Assembly Taxation Committee sometime during the week of March 9th. Staff met with Assemblywoman McClain on Friday and gave her the original BDR language as we submitted it and the amended BDR language because what we submitted and what was written up was not the same thing. SB88, the City of Reno bill, is being reworked to add language about tax depreciation and resetting the values. BDR54, which is the bill from Ms. Smith and Ms. Kirkpatrick concerning abatements, redevelopment districts and STAR bonds, has still not “dropped.” Ms. Clewett noted that the Council was sent a link to the interim study that was presented last week at a joint Assembly/Senate taxation committee meeting. The report is about 284 pages and there is some interesting information in the report. Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll stated he attended a League of Cities Meeting this morning at which there was discussion on AB32 and AB80 regarding the sewer lateral issue brought up by the PUC (Public Utilities Commission) over a year ago. AB80 was submitted by the League of Cities on behalf of all cities in Nevada, before there was any determination as to whether or not the PUC had any jurisdiction. In the September/October, it was determined that the intent of the Legislature was to exclude sewer laterals and there has been lots of legal discussion since then, but the issue has not gone away. AB32 was brought forward on behalf of NACO (Nevada Association of Counties), through Esmeralda County, to determine that there is no jurisdiction by the PUC (Public Utilities Commission) on the sewer lateral issue. So, dealing with “wet utilities” such as storm drain systems and sewer systems, it appears AB 32 will be discussed on March 4th. AB80 is supposed to be presented at the same time, but we are trying to get the bill pulled, or at least heard after AB32 has been put in place. Council Member Carrigan stated that when we put forth a bill regarding depreciation several years ago, it was deemed unconstitutional. He asked if the bill Reno is putting through was now constitutional. Mr. Driscoll stated that Reno seems to feel that with some clarifications that they received from the LCB (Legislative Council Bureau) that there may be a way to address depreciation and address the resetting of depreciation in a manner that would not make it a constitutional issue. It is the belief that the re-setting of depreciation upon sale of a property can


Page 12 of 17

be done without having to go through the full constitutional process, which would take five to seven years. Ms. Clewett noted that the 30th anniversary of the Secret Witness Program is this year. There will be a luncheon on June 11th. City Attorney Adams expressed concern that Mr. Joiner was traveling “on his own dime” while conducting official city business. Mr. Driscoll explained that Mr. Joiner is a board member for a financial institution and they annually go to Washington, DC for a board meeting. For the last two years, he has stayed over an extra day on his trip, for which the City pays a small portion of his expenses for that extra day.

6.2 Presentation, discussion and possible direction for support of the NDOT Pyramid Highway (C Street to Roberta Lane) Public Safety Improvement Project (Time: 3:45:30 p.m.)

Public Works Director Wayne Seidel noted that staff has been working with NDOT (Nevada Department of Transportation) since 2004 in reviewing the section of Pyramid Highway from “C” Street to McCarran Boulevard for public safety and access management improvements which include raised median curbs, protected turn pockets, and eliminating left turn movements at two intersections (“D” and “F” Streets). To provide and construct these public improvements, three blocks on each side of on-street parking will be removed and eliminated. This proposed NDOT public safety project is currently slated for a late spring/early summer constructions start. He then introduced NDOT Project Coordinator Natalie Caffaratti, who gave a presentation on the proposed project. In addressing the concerns expressed by Mr. Fiannaca under public comments, Ms. Caffaratti noted that they will be focusing primarily on the “C” Street to Prater Way section of Pyramid Highway and they will do a reevaluation of the improvements to the north of Prater. Ms. Caffaratti discussed the drawbacks to a center raised median, stating that the on-street parking on Pyramid will be eliminated, impacting businesses and residences and putting the parking on the adjacent side streets; bicyclists will have to travel as a vehicle in this area; traffic volume increase on side streets. She said the advantages to improving safety include: island will provide pedestrian refuge and left turn storage at “E” Street (turning options at “D” and “F” Streets will be removed); the islands will also act as a traffic calming measure. Council Member Carrigan asked how many people attended the public hearings and how they were notified. Ms. Caffaratti stated they sent out flyers to all the adjacent property owners in December. She stated last week Real Property Agent David Vill and NDOT Traffic Safety Coordinator Tom Lightfoot went door-to-door to hand out flyers and discuss the project with the business owners in the area. Council Member Ratti said that in deference to the public comment, she felt that business access issues should be added to the list of disadvantages. She said she read the entire safety audit and it did not include a recommendation for a median. Ms. Ratti asked for an explanation of how the decision regarding the medians was made and a discussion ensued regarding the history of the


Page 13 of 17

project and how it developed into the current scope of work. Ms. Ratti commented that having left turn pockets actually allowed traffic to speed up, because drivers would no longer have to stop for cars making left turns. Ms. Ratti also asked about the potential for a bike lane in the future. The response was that it was a possibility in the distant future, but there is currently no room to create a bike lane and they would have to encroach upon the adjacent properties to create a bike lane. Ms. Ratti asked how important was the raised median to the traffic safety issue and could the project be successful with all the other elements, but not the raised median. Ms. Caffaratti stated that the raised median was the “meat and potatoes” in addressing the safety issues. Ms. Ratti asked if there were any significant changes made to the plan after input was received from the public hearing(s) or from the door-to-door visits. Ms. Caffaratti stated they did not receive any specific comments from the public meetings. Mr. Vill stated that they walked both sides of the street from “C” Street to Prater Way, early in the afternoon. They talked to approximately 100 people and overwhelmingly, they either had no opposition or were in favor of the project. There were two people who were upset because of the removal of the street parking and two business owners who did express unhappiness about sending some of the traffic through the neighborhoods. In his opinion, based on the conversations with the people who lived or worked in the area, they supported the project. Ms. Ratti asked about the impact of construction on the business owners. Mr. Vill noted that most of the work will be done at night, or after hours, and access to businesses will be maintained. Ms. Caffaratti stated NDOT will phase the project; doing marathon weekends for the major intersections; and closing sections of roadway in 24 hour increments. There was a discussion regarding the improvements and the anticipated increase in the speed of the vehicles resulting from the safety improvements. Council Member Schmitt asked where the project goes from here. Ms. Caffaratti stated they anticipate advertising for bids in April, with construction starting in July. She said that whether or not the safety portion of the project is supported, they will proceed with the preservation elements; pedestrian signalization, signage and ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) upgrades. Council Member Schmitt said the unfortunate aspect of roadway safety management is that it is based on the number of accidents and loss of life that help move these project forward. It is important to realize that this process has been on-going for five years and we have to make a decision based the information we have available. Council Member Salerno noted he would be abstaining from the vote on this issue because he is an owner of property along Pyramid Highway and would be affected by this action. Council Member Smith made a motion to support the NDOT Pyramid Highway public safety improvement project from “C” Street to McCarran Boulevard. The motion was seconded by Council Member Ratti. City Manager Carey noted that staff recommendations have changed.


Page 14 of 17

We will still study the section of Pyramid from Prater Way to McCarran Boulevard and that section will be subject to future discussions. He recommended that the motion include improvements from “C” Street to Prater Way only. Council Member Ratti asked that because these improvements have the potential of increasing the speed of traffic on Pyramid, she would like staff to keep the Council informed of some of the other pedestrian safety measures that can be taken on this roadway. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to support the NDOT Pyramid Highway public safety improvement project from “C” Street to Prater Way. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSTAIN. Motion carried.

6.3 Possible motion to conduct a Closed Labor Relations Proceeding (Closed per

NRS 288.220) (Time: 4:42:04 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to adjourn to a closed labor proceeding. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 4:42 p.m. and reconvened at 5:57 p.m.

6.4 Discussion, Consideration and Approval of a memorandum of understanding

between the City and the Fire Chief Officers Association, July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2010 (Time: 4:57:13 p.m.)

Mayor Pro tem Schmitt asked that staff make one presentation regarding all the labor agreements, with one question and discussion period, followed by separate votes on each item. For clarification in reading the minutes, the presentation for each labor agreement/amendment is listed separately, under that agenda item. Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll and Human Resources Director Chris Syverson explained that the Fire Chief Officers have requested to add the ability to utilize a catastrophic leave bank to which they may donate or utilize hours when a catastrophic illness or injury strikes. This leave bank will be used in combination with the IAFF Local 1265 Catastrophic Leave Bank. Ms. Syverson noted that this is a common practice among city employees, but these bargaining units did not have this ability. Additionally, with the retirement of the Assistant Fire Marshal and Fire Inspector II, it has become necessary to utilize the Fire Marshal to cover standby. The Fire Chief has requested that language be added to allow him to designate standby at his discretion. (Time: 5:04:15 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve the memorandum of understanding between the City and the Fire Chief Officers Association, July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2010. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Page 15 of 17

6.5 Discussion, Consideration and Approval of a memorandum of understanding to the IAFF 1265 Contract, July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2010 (Time: 4:57:13 p.m.)

Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll and Human Resources Director Chris Syverson stated that during the last negotiation session it was agreed to allow the accrual of compensatory time, and allow it to be credited to the employee’s Holiday Compensatory Time Bank. Following ratification and Council approval, it was found that it is not possible to intermix Holiday time and Overtime related to compensatory time under the Fair Labor Standards Act. This change will allow a separate time bank to be maintained. Also, the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) clarified the language regarding call back provisions and the proposed contract brings those changes into the contract, as required. Ms. Syverson noted that there is no additional cost to the City for either the IAFF or Fire Chief’s contract amendments. (Time: 5:04:51 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the memorandum of understanding to the IAFF 1265 Contract, July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2010. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.6 Consideration, discussion and possible approval on the ratification of a

bargaining agreement between the City of Sparks and the Sparks Police Protective Association (SPPA) Police Sergeants and Senior Marshals (Time: 5:00:57 p.m.)

Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll and Human Resources Director Chris Syverson noted that the SPPA Sergeants and Senior Marshals have reached a tentative agreement on contract changes for the July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010 contract period. Ms. Syverson stated that the police contracts expired July 1, 2008 and staff has been in active negotiations for some time. Ms. Syverson stated she felt that this labor agreement was beneficial for both sides and that it was also cost neutral. She noted that there are costs associated with the other three police labor agreements, but it was understood at the very beginning of negotiations that the City had an inability to pay, which meant that any issue brought up for negotiation needed to be cost neutral. The recommendations for 6.6, 6.7, and 6.8 have all been absorbed by the Police Department in other measures and they are not new budget numbers. (Time: 5:05:25 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to ratify the bargaining agreement between the City of Sparks and the Sparks Police Protective Association (SPPA) Police Sergeants and Senior Marshals. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


bargaining agreement between the City of Sparks and the Sparks Police Protective Association (SPPA) Non-Supervisory Unit (Time: 5:01:57 p.m.)


Page 16 of 17

Human Resources Director Chris Syverson noted that the SPPA Non-Supervisory [bargaining] Unit has reached a tentative agreement on contract changes for the July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010 contract period. Mr. Driscoll noted he has been involved in the labor process as the chief negotiator [for the City] for a long time, but this negotiation session had a different tenor that in the past. The willingness of the Sparks Police Protective Association to work under the existing fiscal constraints and the innovative ideas they came up with resulted in an agreement that was satisfactory to both parties. Council Members Schmitt, Carrigan, Smith, and Ratti thanked the Police Department’s bargaining units for “stepping up to the plate” and cooperating in these negotiations; given the economic constraints being experienced by everyone at this time. (Time: 5:05:52 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to ratify the bargaining agreement between the City of Sparks and the Sparks Police Protective Association (SPPA) Non-Supervisory Unit. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


bargaining agreement between the City of Sparks and the Sparks Police Protective Association (SPPA) Lieutenants (Time: 4:45:30 p.m.)

Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll and Human Resources Director Chris Syverson noted that the SPPA Lieutenant [bargaining unit]. have reached a tentative agreement on contract changes for the July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010 contract period. Mr. Driscoll then reviewed the changes as listed in the staff report and responded to questions and concerns from Council. (Time: 5:06:20 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to ratify the bargaining agreement between the City of Sparks and the Sparks Police Protective Association (SPPA) Lieutenants. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: None. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items: None.

9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 5:07:07 p.m.) Council Member Smith welcomed Colton Smith, his eighth grandchild, to the world. He was born February 22, 2009. Council Member Schmitt noted that the Sparks branding issue has been a top topic this past week. He received an e-mail that was sent to all the Council Members and after several conversations with the person, she asked him to extend her apologies to the Council and staff for


Page 17 of 17

the tone of her initial e-mail and for not taking the time to study the issue before she made comments. 10. *Adjournment (Time: 5:09:23 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:09 p.m. _______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________ City Clerk >>>

Page 1 of 8

CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORKSHOP AGENDA 3:00 P.M. Monday, March 2, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 2:59:31 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 2:59 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 2:59:35 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:01:15 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Phil Salerno *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:01:40 p.m.)

None 3. Departmental Presentations for Fiscal Year 2009‐2010 Budget (Time: 3:11:31 p.m.)

3.0 Finance Director’s Overview (Time: 3:11:31 p.m.) Finance Director Tom Minton reviewed that the City just passed the second anniversary of budget cuts, which encompasses three fiscal years. He noted that budget reductions began in February 2007, through implementing of hiring freezes and reducing Services & Supplies by 3%, and further Service & Supplies reductions occurred in FY 2008 of 5%. In May 2007 an additional reduction of $2.8 million was taken out of the budget. In FY 2008, the approved budget was reduced another $2.8 million through Services & Supplies reductions, moved General Fund temporary road employees to the Road Fund, reduced Parks & Recreation, reduced insurance premium transfers, and a 2% swing from the debt service rate to the operating rate. We continued on through 2008 by reducing Services & Supplies by 6.3% in May 2008 to FY 2009. In September 2008, we reduced departmental budgets by $1.6 million by delaying tech refresh, police overtime reductions, and sweeping vacant positions to City Manager Holds. In October 2008, we transferred Special Events from Parks & Recreation to the Redevelopment Agency. On December 1, 2008, another $2.5 million cut involving layoffs, temporary staff reductions, freeze of public safety positions, reduction of public safety overtime and callback. On January 12, 2009, we reduced the budget another $2.7 million by laying off 21 employees, cancelled the master plan update, voluntary pay and benefit reductions, reduction of Fire overtime and callback and again sweep of vacant positions to City Manager hold. We transferred some Parks employees to the Capital Project Funds. All in all, over this period of time, the budgets were cut $14.5 million. Actual spending reductions from FY 2007 to the proposed FY 2010 are approximately $5 million. In each of those years, our costs are not static. There are worker’s compensation increases, health insurance increases. In FY 2010, there are large increases in the Public Employee Retirement System (PERS). For the years that we have cost of living adjustments (COLAs), we basically need $4 million new dollars just to break even in the general fund. Overall without the changes we’ve made (layoffs, voluntary reductions, etc.) the reduction in spending is probably $10 million over that period. The City of Reno has reduced their budget in two steps by about $26.6 million. They are contemplating, in a worst case scenario, further reductions of $18 million. Washoe County has taken a formal reduction of $9.8 million reduction thus far, but may be looking from best to worst, for FY 2010 and 2011, total cuts of $29 million for those two years (best case) and $63 million under a worst case scenario.

The City of Sparks is moving forward without dire predictions due to the strong advanced work that was done in 2007 through 2009 budgeting. We are proposing further reductions in 2010. For the short term, our revenue projections are more conservative than either Reno or Washoe County. We are currently estimating

Minutes of the City Council Budget Workshop for March 2, 2009

Page 2 of 8

a decline of 18% in consolidated tax revenues for FY 2009. Mr. Minton stated that with the declines being as steep as they have been, his expectation is that there will be a 2% revenue increase in FY 2010. Forecasts had been for 20% declines in December 2008. In November 2008, we were down 19.8% vs. 20%. There was a slight uptake in consumer spending in both January and February 2009 and the budget has 20% decreases built into the forecasts.

We are also working on FY 2011 through 2014 forecasts for a five year projection of where we think things will

be. The 2009‐2010 property tax projections include a 6% decrease, utilizing the treasurer’s numbers. This is due to a 15% decrease in land values across the county and the other decreases made throughout the newer real areas of Sparks.

Business license revenues are holding up well and we continue to monitor those monthly. We are still only

seeing a 2% to 2.5% decline in that category. Franchise fees are flat, and Mr. Minton stated that he has forecasted a 2% increase in consolidated tax revenues. The decline that really started in October and accelerated through December 2008 is not anticipated to be duplicated. National automobile sales have been forecasted at 9 million units vs. 17 million units for the year and it seems to be achievable. In the category of Charges for Services we have eliminated charges at City Works, with a good showing of $270,000 profit last month.

Built into the expense, we have basically a 19% increase in health insurance costs; PERS cost for public safety

went from 33.5% to 37%, for general employees it went from 20.5% to 21.5%. Workers’ Comp is up and these are ongoing costs. We did budget the Fire COLA and we continue to pay merit increases and overall those costs for the General Fund for Fiscal 2010 are about $2.3 million. We were hoping with this last cut in January that we would get ahead of the curve and that does not appear to be the case. So at this point we are recommending an additional $1.7 million in cuts for Fiscal Year 2010. This will enable us to maintain the fund balance at basically 5% or expenditures. The cuts that are shown on the schedule are just simply proportional – a percent of each department budget to the total required cuts and that’s how it was distributed to each department.

Councilman Schmitt asked if we are looking forward to the Legislature’s proposed issues. Mr. Minton advised

that we have not due to a lack of clarity and admitted that this could be a definite downside. We have also not factored in any additional wholesale decreases of assessed value that the Assessor could make for fiscal 2011. If property values continue to decline and he is looking at values basically around January 1, 2010, it is possible that there could be further declines in assessed values.

Councilmember Ron Smith asked about General Government, as it has a declining balance in the next 2 years

from $12 million to $2 million. Mr. Minton advised that this is due to bond proceeds.

Mr. Minton advised that we are looking at a different method of presenting the budgets and thus far it is loosely modeled on Maricopa County, AZ, Managing for Results program. We are trying at this point to get budgets down to the key service level area and then down to the program level so when we convert to our new financial system. Then we have a crosswalk for converting the data and we can get some year to year comparability. By using Managing for Results, we are hoping to do key service areas this year, next year get down to the program level and then attaching some metric to the program. In other words, instead of measuring inputs (i.e., the # officers per thousand of population) or outputs (i.e., # of arrests), we’re looking for trying to measure the result that our action will decrease some category of violent crime. That’s where we hope to get to over the next two fiscal years. Hopefully, it will aid the Council in resource allocation decisions.

Debi Hunt provided an overview of the Managing for Results budget for fiscal year 2009‐2010. The

departments are working diligently with Finance to get a handle on key service areas and programs to support them. The goal of the Managing for Results is to align the departments’ key service areas with City Council


Page 3 of 8

priorities. To date, the business plans that were developed don’t link to the Council priorities, but we do hope to get there. It will take some time while we develop a detailed cost analysis by program, meaningful measure events of spending, hopefully, and we hope to develop a plan with department heads, council and our citizens to get our key programs in line.

The timeline is in fiscal year 2009‐2010 we are identifying key services areas and programs. Fiscal 2010‐2011

will be budget development, a new accounting system and the comparable data and by fiscal year 2011‐2012 we will be able to provide full use planning‐budgeting evaluations. The outcome of using this system will have a financial wellbeing, a better allocation of financial resources, a better understanding of the services that we are providing and an alignment with Council goals, department strategies, and city services.

Councilman Ron Schmitt asked why the Civil Service Commission, Planning Commission and Regional Planning

Commission are in the budget line under the City Council. Debi Hunt explained that they are in the Legislative Cost Center as they are considered that they perform legislative functions based upon general accounting principles (GAP). For reporting purposes, they are all in one legislative department.

Debi explained that, if we allocate the $1.7 million new cuts across the board, the City Council’s share would

be $10,728, given that there are no employee concessions, no give backs and $1.7 million stays as the cut needed. Councilman Carrigan stated that it appears we are going back to the 2007‐08 budget amounts in each department. Debi explained that this number includes insurance increases, and full salary costs without the 4% reductions. Councilman Carrigan advised that he understood that the travel & training budget was gone and the pay reductions were automatically continuing.

City Manager Shaun Carey explained that all cuts were restored that were made in fiscal year 2008‐09 in the

areas of Council salaries and travel & training, but need the City Council to consider reductions in travel, pay, executive physicals, etc. to allow the budget to be lowered to $387,000. The reason it goes up is the fixed costs associated with PERS expenditures and health insurance premiums as those are rising. If the City Council moved forward to retain their pay reductions it would lower the budget by $8,000 and continuing to reduce the travel & training you would go a little over the amount that is necessary. Obviously, the Council will need to have input into what areas you would like to make cuts. Mr. Carrigan asked if we kept a status quo budget instead of the projections, where are we? Mr. Minton advised that for those who did voluntary wage reductions, we set a sunset date of 6/30/09 for their reductions.

3.1 Council & Mayor (Time: 3:11:31 p.m.) Sparks City Council – presented by Tom Minton and Debi Hunt

Mission Statement: To be a fiscally stable government and provide a progressive foundation and entrepreneurship resources for businesses. This will be accomplished by maintaining and enhancing the quality of life, fulfilling employment, recreational and educational opportunities for all, and by utilizing neighborhoods as the building blocks of the City of Sparks. Key Service Areas • Council ‐ Five elected City Council members operate under the legislative powers of the Sparks Municipal Charter,

Nevada Revised Statutes, and the State Constitution. Their major responsibilities include: enacting, amending, and repealing laws, ordinances, and policies affecting the operations and services of the City of Sparks.

• Civil Service Commission ‐ Five Commissioners, appointed by the City Council for three years, meet once a month to adopt regulations which govern the selection and appointment of all City employees.

• Planning Commission ‐ Seven appointed commissioners meet twice a month (one workshop and one meeting) to review and submit a recommendation of approval or disapproval to the City Council for tentative sub‐division maps; rezoning cases; Annexations: Master Plan Amendments; Title 20 Zoning Ordinances Changes: Regional Plans that concern Sparks; Regional Transportation issues, and to review and approve or deny variance & certain special use permit applications.

• Regional Planning Commission ‐ The Regional Planning Commission is made up of members of each of the three local jurisdictions Planning Commissions. Sparks has three members on the board. The Commission meets once a month to develop and implement the Truckee Meadows Regional Plan. They review City Master Plan amendments for conformance with the Regional Plan.


Page 4 of 8

Effects of Budget Cutbacks ‐ Savings Options • Continue Voluntary Pay Reductions • Reduce Travel and Training • Employee Physicals Councilman Schmitt asked what the large cut in the Planning Commission budget was. Debi Hunt advised there had been a significant amount in their travel and training budget. There is still a travel budget of $4,000 and $4,000 in training in that budget. Regional Planning Commission’s budget is dictated by their board and Finance loads the numbers without questions. Councilman Carrigan stated that he waived his health care nine years ago, but there is still a deduction coming out for him. Councilmember asked about alignment with the County Commissioner pay cuts, but the City Attorney’s Office has determined that it is not about what is paid out, but what is in the statute.

Mayor of City of Sparks – presented by Debi Hunt Mission Statement: To be a fiscally stable municipal government and provide a progressive foundation and entrepreneurship resources for businesses. This will be accomplished by maintaining and enhancing the quality of life, fulfilling employment, recreational, and educational opportunities for all, and by utilizing neighborhoods as the building blocks of the City of Sparks. Key Service Area ‐ Mayor ‐ Executive Branch of the Government: The Mayor is separately elected at large and serves as chairman of the City Council. The Mayor presides over meetings of the City Council, performs all necessary emergency duties to protect the general health, welfare and safety of the City, and any other duties prescribed by law. Key Service Activities ‐ Government Leader: The Mayor performs all necessary emergency duties to protect the general health, welfare and safety of the City, and any other duties prescribed by law.

Effects of Budget Cutbacks ‐ Savings Options: • Continue Voluntary Pay Reductions • Reduce Travel and Training • Employee Physical • Other suggestions?

The City Attorney asked whether voluntary reductions for insurance rebates stay within the department or go to the general fund as a whole. Tom Minton advised that the reductions stay within the department that makes the concessions. 3.2 Judicial (Time: 3:11:31 p.m.) Sparks Municipal Court presented by Judge McCarthy

Mission Statement ‐ The Sparks Municipal Court provides a forum for the fair and impartial adjudication of the Sparks Municipal Code and NRS violations by resolving cases timely & efficiently in a safe environment, and in a manner that promotes & upholds the integrity and independence of the judiciary system, maximizing the confidence of the community in the Court. Key Service Areas Judiciary – The purpose of the Judiciary is to:

• Provide the daily administration of justice in all criminal misdemeanor matters that come before the court • Provide community outreach in our continuing effort to build trust and confidence in our judicial system • Represent the City of Sparks and the Sparks Municipal Court in local and statewide criminal justice committees • Represent the City of Sparks and the Sparks Municipal Court in judicial organizations and committees • Maintain judicial independence as the 3rd branch of government

Court Administration ‐ The purpose of the Court Administration is to: • Plan, coordinate, administer and manage court operations and resources to ensure cost effective and efficient

service for the Sparks Municipal Court • Represent the Sparks Municipal Court at City, County and State meetings • Meet all City and State requirements for monetary and statistical information

Court Clerical Support ‐ The purpose of the Court Clerical Support is to: • Provide customer service to the public and other agencies in the criminal justice system in an efficient and

professional manner • Receipt, account and balance daily cash receipts, cash bail and bail bonds • Court Clerical Support • Provide Hispanic Interpreter service • Provide in‐court support for all matters before the court


Page 5 of 8

Court Marshal Division ‐ The purpose of the Marshal Division is to: • Provide security to ensure the safety of all persons entering the courthouse, as well as the continuous safety of

all court personnel • Effect warrant service • Provide assistance in enforcement of court orders • Handles and monitors all aspects of prisoner activities within the courthouse • Act as liaison for the Sparks Municipal Court with other law enforcement agencies in state, as well as out of state

Indigent Defense ‐ The purpose of Indigent Defense is to comply with all constitutional and state laws for legal defense services for indigent defendants charged with misdemeanors within the City of Sparks Specialty Court ‐ The purpose of Specialty Court is to provide a structured program designed to help defendants gain control over addiction, develop responsible living skills, accountability, and to avoid further entry into the criminal justice system Key Service Measurements

• Measure time to disposition by collecting data to ensure that the length of time if takes to process a case is no more than 90 days form filing to final disposition.

• Provide and maintain the mandated statistical data and reports for State Administrative Office of the Courts. • Key Service Measurements • Track the success/failure rate of drug court defendants based on the 10 key components required by the State of

Nevada (per Federal guidelines) to maintain funding • Track the timeliness of service of arrest warrants, court orders, and other contacts by the marshals resulting in

court appearance, compliance, arrest Councilman Carrigan stated that the cuts are really on $11,000 not $58,000. Shaun advised that the estimate for this budget includes the labor contracts, resolutions, insurance, PERS and we cannot run the court for the same amount of money next year as we are doing this year because of fixed costs that are increasing. The budget for next year does increase by fixed, contractual relationships or directives that we have to maintain fiscal stability of these departments. There is a need for $58,000+ budget cuts in order to run the court next year. Last year the Court made up their budget cuts from Administrative Assessments fund. Mike Carrigan asked if the point he is trying to make is that every single line is from mandated increases. Judge McCarthy stated that there are five different resolutions and contracts that are at work in the Court. Judge McCarthy advised that the Court cannot go any further with cuts. Every department had to make cuts, but not everybody had a fund to draw from to supplement the general fund and kept from layoffs. Judge McCarthy advised there is still a pool of money but they cannot take $58,000 from that fund. The two choices are layoffs (1 to 3 positions) or deplete the fund, which is not an option because the state mandates won’t allow that. Julia Ratti asked if the bottom line of $2.1 million to manage to at the Court and the Judge acknowledged that this is the budget figure. Councilman Schmitt noted that the Court is not below the 2007 budget figures while other departments within the City are. Other departments have gone into their own pockets to make these cuts. Less than a decade ago, the Court cost the City zero dollars. This was a balanced department that spent what came in. Ten years later, the Department is not general fund neutral. If this trend continues, we’re going to have a substantial amount of local government budget going to court services. Someone needs to get on the bandwagon on the State level and it must be addressed or the City Council will have to make some tough decisions. Judge McCarthy advised that she has no control over the bargaining units and was not part of the budget process until 2004. There are only four employees that are not part of the bargaining units. The Court has 50% of their clients who have no ability to pay and ask for community service. Julia Ratti asked where the revenues generated by departments are shown. Tom Minton stated that he did not attribute any lowering of revenues, it is not reflected in their budgets and their budgets are reflective of only the expense side. Effects of Budget Cutbacks:

• Increase in workload on all support staff • Cross‐training and transfer of duties within the support staff • Timeliness of services: customer service, in‐house compliance reports • Use of Municipal Court Administrative Assessments to cover previous budget reductions

Proposed Budget Cuts: • Court will analyze whether it will continue to utilize Municipal Court Administrative Assessments, have a

reduction in staff or a combination of both to cover the necessary budget cuts for FY 09/10 • Utilizing the Municipal Court Administrative Assessments may be affected due to the economic times and ability

to collect money • Reduction in staffing would result in a continued loss of services, revenue and compliance issues


Page 6 of 8

3.3 City Attorney’s Office (Time: 3:11:31 p.m.) Mission Statement The City Attorney Office is charged with the responsibility of representing the City of Sparks as its attorney to: stopped at 4:47:53

• Represent the City in litigation filed by and against the City. • Provide legal advice and assistance to the City. • Represent the City and citizens of Sparks in prosecuting criminal complaints and citations alleging misdemeanor

crimes committed in the City of Sparks, investigated by Sparks Police Department and tried before the Sparks Municipal Court.

Key Service Areas Civil Division ‐ The purpose of the Civil Division is to:

• Represent the City in Federal Court and State Court. • Provide legal advice and written legal opinions to all City Departments, the City Council and the City Manager. • Review and Investigate Claims or Potential Claims Against the City and advise Risk Management. • Aid Departments in negotiating Contracts and Agreements. • Draft Legislation. • Draft Ordinances. • Draft Contracts and Agreements for City Departments. • Review Proposed State Legislation. • Appear before the Nevada Legislature. • Appear and provide legal advice during City Council, Parks and Recreation, Civil Service, Joint Agency, Flood

Management, Risk Management, and Planning Commission Meetings. • Review all City Council Agenda Items.

Goals Civil Division • Represent City in 70% of all civil cases reducing outside litigation cost. • Minimize Risk Management claim payouts to 50% of those asserted. • Maintain a 97% success rate in defending civil actions brought against the City. • Since 1997, the Civil Division has saved Sparks taxpayers over $135 million in claimed damages against the City of

Sparks. Criminal Division ‐ The purpose of the Criminal Division is to:

• Prosecute all misdemeanors in Sparks Municipal Court. • Defend appeals of criminal convictions in State District & Supreme Court. • Provide Advice to local law enforcement. • Provide education to community regarding criminal laws and proceedings. • Support Neighborhood Programs.

Goals of Criminal Division • Obtain convictions in 70% of all cases that actually go to trial. • Reduce continuances to less than 15% of all cases.

Victim Advocate Services ‐ The purpose of the Victim Advocate Service is to: • Advise and assist victims of domestic violence through the criminal process • Arrange for and counsel witnesses • Assist victims in obtaining social services and other help • Provide education to the community regarding domestic violence.

Goals of Victim Advocate Service • Attend 80% of all trials involving victims of domestic violence in Sparks Municipal Court • Annually Prepare public awareness brochures, and information websites.

General Administration • Provide support for City Attorney’s Office and aid the individual departments in preparing documents.

Effects of Budget Cutbacks • History of City Attorney’s Budget Cutbacks • Effects of Budget Cutbacks • FY08‐09 • Lost 1/3 of Criminal Prosecutor Staff. • Additional Criminal workload placed on civil attorneys. • FY09‐10 • Anticipated initial cutback of $46,000.00 • Criminal Deputies have more cases per attorney, but have less time to work on them due to unpaid furloughs. • Civil Deputies will have less time to perform their duties due to unpaid furloughs. • Appearance at commission meetings will be reduced. • Substantial delays in providing legal opinions/advice to City Departments.


Page 7 of 8

• More State and Federal civil litigation matters may be “farmed out” to private attorneys ultimately adding additional litigation costs to Sparks Taxpayers.

3.4 Police Department (Time: 3:11:31 p.m.)

Mission Statement ‐ The Sparks Police Department is dedicated to being a leader in building a strong, safe community through innovative services, sound management and a commitment to our employees. Key Service Areas Office of the Chief ‐ The purpose of the Office of the Chief is to provide leadership and direction to Police Department personnel so they can better serve the community. Administration Division ‐ The purpose of the Administrative Division is to provide:

• Community‐based programs, property and evidence collection. • Maintenance, training and Emergency Dispatch Center to both departments members and the community.

Patrol Division ‐ The purpose of the Patrol Division is to provide uniformed police response to critical and non‐critical incidents to the citizens of Sparks so they can feel safe and secure while enhancing their quality of life. Detective Division ‐ The purpose of the Detective Division is to provide follow‐up to qualifying criminal investigations for felony crimes to citizens of Sparks so they can have closure to the police report they filed. Records Division ‐ The purpose of Records Division is provide departmental support and to facilitate citizens’ reports to departmental personnel and citizens of Sparks so they can better perform their job and have access to the Police Department. Key Service Activity Measurements • Reduce crime in the following areas by 10% utilizing the department philosophy of COMSTAT:

• The Big 5 (Robbery, Grand Theft Auto and Vehicle, Commercial and Residential Burglaries). • Sexual Assault • Aggravated Assault • Traffic Accidents.

Key Service Measurements • Reduce response times to Priority One calls for service from approximately 10 minutes to 6 minutes. • Analyze and possibly implement changes which reduce Department workload, striving for efficiency and effectiveness

throughout the year. • Market the success, challenges and the vision of the Sparks Police Department to gain trust and support of our

citizens while fostering an interactive partnership by: • An interactive and comprehensive website developed and implemented. • A proactive, comprehensive, sustainable Media Program has be developed and implemented.

Key Service Area Goals • Continue public speaking engagements for the Chief. • A program to promote the Department through Support Services.

Effects of Budget Cutbacks FY 08/09 ‐ 2008/2009 budget reductions totaled $1,539,000. • 9 vacant positions and 3 Department personnel layoffs (7 Officers; 1 Dispatcher Sergeant; 1 Dispatcher;

1 Administrative Secretary; 1 Property/Evidence Technician; 1 Police Office Assistant) Effects of Budget Cutbacks FY09/10

• Identified $577,827 for FY 09/10 budget reduction. • The further lowering of staff, either directly or indirectly, impacts safety to our citizens and officers. • Below are explanations of how the Department would be impacted by additional layoffs:

Effects of Budget Cutbacks ‐ Officers • Further reductions of sworn staff will jeopardize officer safety in their already dangerous environment.

• Less officers on patrol may delay proper cover (back‐up) causing unfavorable odds of officers per suspect in a violent encounter.

• Statistics show that assaults on Sparks Police Officers has doubled in the last year. In 2007, 14 were assaulted. The same period for 2008, shows 28 were assaulted.

• Effects of Budget Cutbacks ‐ Officers • Further reduction of officers would only worsen our minimum patrol shift staffing. • Minimum staffing has not increased in 14 years.

• 1994 population was 57,573 with 1.37 officers per 1,000. • Today’s population is approximately 90,000 with 1.22 officers per 1,000 (The city grew by 32,427).

• Further reductions of sworn officers would negatively effect our response time to high priority calls for service. • Minimum staffing per shift. • 34.2 square miles. • Critical incident response to far reaching areas.

• Reduction of Police Officers would lower our ratio of officers per 1,000 population.


Page 8 of 8

• 58 officers needed to reach 1.8 standard. • ICMA standard of 2.05. • Calls for service ratio.

Effects of Budget Cutbacks ‐ Detectives • Reduction of Officers would cause Detectives to be re‐assigned to Patrol, further worsening the case load.

• Child Abuse Example. • Property Crime Example.

• Reduction of Police Officers may jeopardize current inter‐local agreements. • Regional Gang Unit • Special Enforcement Team • Repeat Offender Program • DEA Task Force • Regional Sex Offender Notification Unit • Effects of Budget Cutbacks ‐ COMSTAT

• Further reductions of non‐sworn personnel would affect the overall support function they serve. • Police Officers • Police Assistants • Police Office Assistants

Effects of Budget Cutbacks ‐ Safety • The Department is at a point where any further reductions would be too devastating to an already understaffed

police department. • Safety is paramount to the citizens we serve in our community and safety to our employees weighs equally heavy. • The Police Department has reached an absolute critical point, where no further cuts can occur without seriously

endangering the community and our officers. 4. Comments: 4.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 3:11:31 p.m.) 5. *Adjournment (Time: 5:16:55 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:16 p.m. _______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________ City Clerk >>>

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 3:00 P.M. Monday, March 9, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:01:08 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Pro tem Ron Schmitt at 3:01 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:01:16 p.m.) Mayor Pro tempore Ron Schmitt, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Mayor Geno Martini, ABSENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:01:35 p.m.) The invocation was given by Bishop Don Ross from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:02:48 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Mike Carrigan. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:03:13 p.m.) None. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:03:24 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. Mayor Pro tempore Schmitt noted that items 6.5 and 7.1 have been withdrawn from the agenda. Council Member Carrigan asked that the interviews for the Planning Commission be moved to the last item on the agenda. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: (Time: 3:04:45 p.m.) 3.1 Regular Meetings of February 9, 2009, and February 23, 2009 A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meetings of February 9, 2009, and February 23, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Proclamation – Colon Cancer Awareness Month (Time: 3:05:24 p.m.) Council Member Ron Smith read a proclamation naming March 2009 as Colon Cancer Awareness Month, in support of the statewide Colon Cancer Task Force, whose goal is to

Minutes of the City Council Meeting for March 9, 2009

Page 2 of 11

increase colon cancer screening rates in the State of Nevada. Dr. Craig Sandy accepted the proclamation of the Nevada Cancer Institute.

4.2 Presentation by Girls Action Project Society (GAP) (Time: 3:08:04 p.m.) Mayor Pro tem Schmitt invited this group of young ladies to make a presentation regarding the purpose of the group and their goals.

4.3 Presentation on the University of Nevada, Reno (Time: 3:19:12 p.m.)

Dr. Milton Glick, President of the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR) provided an update on the goals, priorities and accomplishments of university for the past two years. Measuring Success

BASELINE CURRENT GOAL

Grow Student Enrollment Fall 07 Fall 08 Fall 12

Undergraduate Enrollment 13,205 13,367 15,705 Graduate Enrollment (incl.

MDs) 3,476 3,500 4,101 Diversity of

Undergraduates/graduates 19%/12% 20%/13% 25%17%

Improve Retention Rates (first‐time, full‐time freshmen)

Fall 05 cohort

Fall 06 cohort

Fall 10 cohort

First year persistence 77% 79% 85%

Second year retention 83% 84% 90% Foster Culture of Completion Fall 01

cohort

Fall 02 cohort

Fall 07 cohort

New Freshmen 6‐year graduation rate 48% 48% 60%

Average years to graduation of new freshmen 4.7 4.8 4.5

% of grad students completing degree within 7 yrs. 75% 75% 90%

Enhance Quality of Educational Experience Fall 07 Fall 08 Fall 12

Total National Merit Finalists enrolled 10 17 70

SCH taught by ranked faculty (lower/upper division) 56%/77% 61%/77% 60%/80%

Number of TA positions 271 283 350

Research and Creative Activity FY07 FY08 FY12


Page 3 of 11

Sponsored research expenditures $69.5M 74.6M $120M

Federal sponsored research expenditures $63.9M $64.50 $110M

Science & Eng. R&D Expenditures $98.9 (FY06)

$95.8 (FY07)

$170M (FY11)

Number of Research Assistant positions 517 582 650

Number of refereed journal publications

Number of artistic performances & juried exhibitions

Governor’s Recommended General Fund Appropriations for the University of Nevada, Reno:

2009 Base

2010 Gov. Rec.

Dollars Percent

University of Nevada 144,152,936 72,357,693 (71,795,243) ‐ 49.8%

School of Medicine 36,333,039 34,570,216 (1,762,823) ‐ 4.9%

Intercollegiate Athletics 7,054,213 7,000,854 (53,359) ‐ 0.8%

Statewide Programs 8,892,041 7,938,284 (953,757) ‐10.7%

Agricultural Experiment Station 9,686,428 9,249,800 (436,628) ‐ 4.5%

Cooperative Extension Service 9,976,270 8,973,739 (1,002,531) ‐10.0%

Business Center North 2,681,831 2,403,163 (278,668) ‐10.4%

State Health Lab 2,129,397 2,001,178 (128,219) ‐ 6.0%

Total 220,906,155 144,494,927 (76,411,228) ‐ 34.6%


Page 4 of 11

Appropriations, Tuition and Fees

Function FY 2009 Budget Base Base Cuts

Percent Reduction

Instruction 111,526,000 3,533,000 3%

Research 17,242,000 3,656,000 21%

Public Service 17,359,000 3,346,000 19%

Academic Support 36,008,000 1,754,000 5%

Student Services 15,055,000 1,842,000 12%

Institutional Support 29,576,000 4,998,000 17%

O & M 47,421,000 1,960,000 4%

Scholarships 8,274,000 ‐0‐ 0%

Total 279,101,000 21,090,000

Contact: [email protected] After his presentation, Mr. Glick responded to questions and concerns from the Council, stating they are doing everything they can to make the necessary budget cuts and still protect the quality of education in the State.

5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:29:30 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.9. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


transfers for the period February 5, 2009 through February 18, 2009 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.

5.2 Consideration and possible approval of Stanford Storm Drain Project

Construction Documents and Construction Services Proposal with Summit Engineering in the amount of $450,000

An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel recommending the City Council approve an Independent Contractor’s Agreement with Summit Engineering for the Stanford Strom Drain Project Construction Documents and Construction Services. Summit Engineering has performed previous engineering for this project and has submitted a proposal to perform these services. Funds have been budgeted and appropriations are available for this project.


Page 5 of 11

5.3 Consideration and possible approval of a contract with Kafoury, Armstrong & Company to perform the annual audit of the City of Sparks, the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency (RPA), and the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility (TMWRF)

An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending the City Council approve an Independent Contractor’s Agreement with Kafoury, Armstrong & Company to perform the annual audit of the City of Sparks, the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency (RPA), and the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility (TMWRF), for a three year period at a total cost of $435,900. Request for proposals were received from four firms and it was determined that Kafoury, Armstrong & Company provided the strongest qualifications for the audit needs of the City. Funds have been budgeted under various appropriate accounts for these services.

5.4 Consideration and possible approval to purchase Invensy’s Process Systems,

Foxboro type distribution control system parts that will upgrade the operations computer monitoring systems for the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility for the amount of $104,155

An agenda item from Operations Superintendent Starlin Jones recommending the City Council approve an exception to bid for the purchase of parts to upgrade the operations computer monitoring systems for the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility. The new system controllers were recently upgraded and this purchase will allow staff to keep the system reliable with a source of repair parts. This is the final phase of a multi-year project. This phase will replace the workstation computers and software in order to maintain compatibility with the new controllers. Funds are available for this purchase.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of an Interlocal Cooperative Agreement

(ICA) with the Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County (RTC) for the Construction Year 2009 through 2011 Program of Projects in anticipation of RTC-5 Revenues

An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel recommending the City Council approve an Interlocal Cooperative Agreement with RTC for the 2009-2011 Program of Projects. The agreement lists the specific projects slated for Sparks, Reno, and Washoe County and staff has included a map in the staff report that shows the location of the proposed projects for Sparks. Funding of these projects is dependent upon the passage of RTC-5 enabling legislation at the State Legislature.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval of the Federally Funded Greenbrae,

Sullivan, El Rancho Drive Accessibility Project, Bid No. 08/09-017, PWP-WA-2009-116 to Atlas Contractors, in the amount of $98,700

An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel recommending the City Council approve a federally funded accessibility project. The scope of work involves the replacement of accessibility ramps, pedestrian and ADA improvements in the area that borders El Rancho Drive, Greenbrae Drive, and Sullivan Lane. The City received 13 bids, with Atlas Contractors being the lowest bidder. Funds are available for this project.


Page 6 of 11

5.7 Consideration and possible approval of the Federally Funded Zephyr Way Curb, Gutter, and Sidewalk Project, Bid No. 08/09-016, PWP-WA-2009-117 to Mountain West Excavation, in the amount of $148,342.50

An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel recommending the City Council approve a federally funded accessibility project. The scope of work involves the replacement of existing curb, gutter sidewalk and pavement on Zephyr Way between Rock Boulevard and 11th Street, as well as repaving this portion of the roadway. The City received 14 bids, with Mountain West Excavation being the lowest bidder. Funds are available for this project.

5.8 Consideration and possible approval of the Peoples Drain Ditch

Improvement Project to Reno Tahoe Construction (RTC), CIP 9099, in the amount of $1,264,025

An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel recommending the City Council award the bid for the Peoples Drain Ditch Improvement Project.. This project encloses the final section of the Peoples Drain and includes approximately 2000 linear feet of open channel. This will greatly improve drainage and maintenance of the existing drain by enclosing the open channel with a concrete box culvert. Funds are available for this project.

5.9 Consideration and possible approval of the purchase of two Columbia

Cascade TimberForm play structures for Rock Park White Water Project, CIP 9047, to Park Pacific in the amount of $61,255

An agenda item from Parks and Recreation Director Stan Sherer recommending the City Council approve the purchase of two play structures for Rock Park, associated with the White Water Project. These play structures will enhance the park and are being provided from budget savings for other park projects. This purchase is exempt from public bid.


6.1 Presentation, discussion and possible direction or approval of Federal, State, Nevada League of Cities and Local Legislative Affairs issues (Time: 3:30:08 p.m.)

Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll and Government Affairs Analyst Kathy Clewett reported the High School Band trip to Ireland is still on schedule and staff is confirming details with Band Leader Mr. Hollenbeck. The stimulus package is being discussed in numerous committee hearings in the legislature, but nothing has been finalized or voted on. She noted that there is about one month left before bills must move from one house to the other; however, 1265 Bill Draft Requests have been submitted and only about 450 have been discussed, so there is still a lot of work to be done. AB98 – Sparks’ bill. Still has not come out yet. We are hearing that it may come out of committee next week or the week after. The language for our charter bill has not yet been submitted.


Page 7 of 11

The City of Reno bills – SB88 and SB95 – will be heard before the Senate Taxation Committee on the 12th. SB88 is being rewritten, so we won’t see the language until the 12th. AB86 – the Nevada League of Cities bill which they carried for the City of Sparks is still out there, but no decisions have been made on it. Mr. Driscoll noted that staff participated in testimony on SB154. This bill deals with two issues related to the negotiation laws – NRS 288. The first component was changing one of the mandatory topics of negotiation and it would require pre-negotiate policies for transfers and reassignments prior to the City being able to make them. There was discussion about cities, counties and other local agencies who use transfers for discipline purposes. Sparks does not do this and we also provide Civil Service protections. Our concern is that this would potential limit the City’s abilities to manage the needs of the city. There is another section in the bill that says the City has the management right to direct employees. We see this amendment as a direct conflict to the previous section. The second component of the bill uses the term “significant,” which could mean that anything that a bargaining unit believes is close to one of the mandatory topics, if they put in writing that they wanted to negotiate that issue, then this amendment would require the City to negotiate that topic, whether it was mandatory or not. The different entities that responded to this issue stated that they would be in perpetual negotiations if this component were to pass. At the end of the day, we heard that a couple of key members of the committee are inclined to pass the amendment on the mandatory topics for transfers and assignments, possibly exempting public safety. This is a large issue because it could hinder management’s ability to satisfy the services we need to provide and also follow direction given by the Council on how we use our resources. Mr. Driscoll stated we have had discussions with the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) regarding the sewer laterals issue – that they want local government to be responsible for identifying the locations of sewer laterals as they leave the main line and cross private property to a business or residence. Staff has argued that the PUC does not have standing and that there has been sufficient legislative intent to corroborate this position. Unfortunately private enterprise has been pushing this issue and there are now two new bills dealing with this issue: AB32 – solidifies that the PUC does not have standing in this matter; and AB80 – attempts to negotiate with the PUC and private enterprise, if we have to. Reno Assemblyman David Bobzien has a BDR to do an interim study on consolidation of law enforcement in Washoe County. Staff provided Mr. Bobzien with out 1996 task force study, as well as an update from the City of Reno. According to the Reno Government Affairs Manager, they are looking to establish a definition for a governance model in which the Sheriff would be the law enforcement commander for this region. The Council approved a resolution that says we would not be willing to participate in anything that changes the governance for the law enforcement function of the City of Sparks; however, we continue to look at shared services or models of efficiency. AB119 – a water planning bill. City Planner Armando Ornelas noted this is a bill to codify the sustainable water initiative that passed on the November ballot in Washoe County. The Regional


Page 8 of 11

Planning Governing Board was in opposition to the original version of the bill and provided direction to staff to work with Assemblywoman Shelia Leslie to revise the draft bill. A working group was formed and a new draft of the bill has been released. It is anticipated that the bill draft will be heard in the Government Affairs Committee next Monday. A discussion was held between Council Member Carrigan and Mr. Ornelas regarding the meaning of a development pattern and how the phrase might be interpreted. Ms. Clewett noted that the Nevada Legislature is holding a Town Hall meeting in Reno on Saturday, at 9:00 a.m. She said she did not know what would be discussed or presented at the meeting. Mr. Ornelas asked Council to provide staff with direction on whether or not they supported the proposed bill draft. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to support the language in the proposed bill, as written, with the caveat that if the language regarding “development pattern” is changed, then “all bets are off.” Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.2 Interview of applicants for Sparks Planning Commission (Time: 4:02:39

p.m.) (This item was heard out of order as the last item on the agenda.) Mayor Pro tem Schmitt noted that there was an extensive list of applicants for the one vacancy on the Planning Commission board. The applicants are listed as follows: Justin Andrews, Ryan Bellows, Jack Byrom, Alex Crosby, James de Prosse, Janet Gould, Laurel Harding, Gary Huels, Justin Ivory, Sylvia Larkin, Judy Moss, Seth Padovan, Bert Ramos, Dorothy Taylor, Dennis Thorman, Gregory Michael Turner, Scott Underwood, Douglas Voelz, Barbara Wright Sanders, and Richard Zastrow. Council Member Ratti asked for clarification of the ethics of a member of the building or development committee serving on the Planning Commission and how any conflicts of interest would be handled. Mayor Pro tem Schmitt confirmed that there are people on the Planning Commission that do have a background in building trades. He said his opinion was that it was up to each individual Council Member whether or not they felt a candidate was the right person for the job. City Attorney Adams stated that as far as the Nevada Ethics in Government laws are concerned, the Ethics Commission looks at each incident on a case by case basis and he is not aware of any specific guidelines they use in considering violations. He said we have had an individual on the Planning Commission in the past that had experience in Architecture and that individual abstained from voting when a project involved his particular business. If someone is a member of the building or development community, they would have more insight and experience regarding the planning commission, but there is also the potential for a conflict of interest. That individual would have to be familiar with the ethics laws and the conflict of interest provisions and would have to abstain when they considered it appropriate. In any case they would need to advise the public and fellow commission members of their involvement in any issues. Mr.


Page 9 of 11

Adams concluded that unfortunately he could not give Ms. Ratti a definite development or trade that might exclude a particular candidate; however, she was free to ask any candidate how they felt their professional life might impact or conflict with the duties of the Planning Commission. Ms. Ratti asked if any of the Council Members had a strong feeling about this issue, one way or another. Council Member Carrigan said his intent was to ask each applicant who their employer was and if they felt there was a potential for any conflicts of interest. He said he wanted to be careful about who they chose for the position because he did not want it to appear that the Council approved someone for the Planning Commission that clearly had a conflict of interest. Mayor Pro tem Schmitt said he felt that it was not necessarily the trade a person was involved in, but the best person for the job—someone that had the ability to be a leader in our community and to look thoroughly at each issue. Council Member Salerno stated that it was no different that serving as Council Member—they had to use their own judgment and if they felt there was a conflict, they needed to abstain from voting. The following applicants were present and were interviewed by the City Council: Justin Andrews, Ryan Bellows, Gary Huels, Justin Ivory, Sylvia Larkin, Judy Moss, Bert Ramos, Dennis Thorman, and Douglas Voelz. After the interviews, Mayor Pro tem Schmitt noted that the decision would be announced at the next council meeting, in two weeks.

6.3 Presentation, discussion and possible action on the Nevada League of Cities and Municipalities Youth Award Program applicants (Time: 3:54:18 p.m.)

Council Member Carrigan introduced the following applicants as the committee selections for submission to the League for the scholarship competition and thanked all of them for participating in the interview process. He noted that the Council is also asking the City to award each of the applicants a $200.00 from the citizens of Sparks. The successful applicants were listed in the staff report as: High School Seniors 2009: Ta-Tiana Anderson-Hall; Jessica Koptke; Jennifer Turner. High School Students 2009: Jessie Gray; Denae Moser; Nicholas Strozza. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to forward the names of the six selected applicants to the Nevada League of Cities and to award all of the applicants $200.00 each. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.4 Consideration and possible approval of FFY09 (Federal Fiscal Year) Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG) funds for continuance of the city’s on-going emergency management efforts (Time: 3:59:35 p.m.)


Page 10 of 11

Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll noted that the $64,702 grant will provide 50% of selected general fund salaries and expenditures related to the City’s emergency management efforts. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to accept the State’s Division of Emergency Management Emergency Management Performance Grant for the federal fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, in the amount of $64,702. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.5 Consideration and possible approval of funding requests for calendar year

2009 special events (Time: 4:01:12 p.m.) This item was withdrawn from the agenda.

6.6 First Reading and possible discussion of Bill No. 2602, PCN09003; A request to Rezone approximately 130.0 acres from A-40 (Agriculture) to NUD (New Urban District) from Kiley Ranch, LLC & Lazy Five Company on a site generally located south of the Tierra Del Sol Planned Development and northeast of the intersection of Sparks Boulevard and Pyramid Way (Time: 4:01:17 p.m.)

City Clerk Linda Patterson read Bill No. 2507 by title, an ordinance rezoning real property owned by the United States Department of Agriculture - Bureau of Land Management to change the zoning from R1-40 (single family residential - 40,000 square feet minimum lot size) to PF (public facility) on a site approximately 17.29 acres in size generally located northeast of the intersection of Disc Drive and Pyramid Highway and west of the Sparks Galleria Planned Development, Sparks, NV; and providing other matters properly relating thereto. Mayor Pro temp Schmitt announced that the public hearing and second reading of this bill will be conducted at the regular City Council Meeting of January 26, 2009. 7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning:

7.1 Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Approval of Resolution No. 3137, Authorizing Medium-Term Obligations in an amount of up to $3,800,000 for the purpose of Refinancing Outstanding Leases Issued for Fire Fighting Facilities and Equipment; Directing the officers of the City to forward materials to the Department of Taxation of the State of Nevada; Providing for the Refinancing of certain Medium-Term Obligations; Providing certain details in connection therewith; and providing the effective date hereof (Time: 4:38:47 p.m.)

This item was withdrawn from the Agenda. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items: None.

9. Comments:

9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 4:38:54 p.m.) Council Member Smith thanked all nine applicants present for the interviews for their interest in serving the citizens of the City of Sparks.


Page 11 of 11

Councilman Salerno requested information on procedures for appointment of the Planning Commissioner. Councilman Carrigan apologized if he ruffled feathers and stated that all of the candidates are very qualified for this commission. Councilwoman Ratti also commended the applicants and asked for clarification of where the applicants and current Planning Commission members reside. 10. *Adjournment (Time: 4:44:05 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:44 p.m. ______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________

City Clerk

>>>

Page 1 of 24

MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORKSHOP 3:00 P.M. Wednesday, March 11, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:00 p.m. 2. *Roll Call Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, Acting City Attorney Wendy Chavez, PRESENT. Pledge of Allegiance The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Schmitt. *Comments from the Public None. 3. Departmental Presentations for Fiscal Year 2009-2010 Budget 3.0 City Manager-Clerk’s Office City Manager Shaun Carey reviewed the budgets for the Manager’s Office as follows: City Manager

• Mission Statement - To enhance the quality of life in Sparks, achieve citizen satisfaction with City Government, and accomplish the goals of the City Council by successfully managing and leading a growing organization. To perform all duties required by law and in support of the Mayor, City Council, City Manager and City Departments.

• Key Service Areas • Mayor / Council Support • City Administration • Information Management • City Clerk

• Mayor / Council Support • Implement City Council Policy • Provide staff support for Mayor and City Council proclamations, correspondence

and City Council agenda review. • City Administration • Manage City Services. • Provide leadership & direction to ensure financial responsibility. • Provide representation to regional & inter-local agencies. • Evaluate department efficiencies and city service effectiveness. • Oversee and direct Redevelopment actives.

• City Administration • Serve as director of Emergency Management during declared emergencies. • Information Management


Page 2 of 24

• Provide internal communication to all City employees detailing the polices, programs, and projects of the City.

• Manage and direct the development and production of public information materials and programs to external target audiences using print, the internet, public access television, and regional news media.

• City Clerk • Perform all duties pursuant to City of Sparks Charter and the Nevada Revised

Statutes. • Provide all public notifications, agendas for City Council meetings, joint meetings

and Redevelopment Agencies meetings. • Provide comprehensive legislative tracking for of all Council actions. • Transcribe minutes for City Council, joint, and Redevelopment Agency meetings. • Conduct regular and special municipal elections. • Codify City ordinances. • Provide information to the public. • Perform records management & administer contracts. • Process community service applications for boards & commissions. • Perform as passport Application Acceptance Office. • Administer mail room functions.

• Key Service Measurements • City-wide implementation of Council directives. • 95% of agenda materials available to Council prior to Council meetings. • 100% Tracking of all legislative bill affecting the City of Sparks. • Increased communication via bi-weekly City Manager Briefings. • Effective communication with City Council. • Enhance internal communications via intranet website to provide internal

announcements. • Strengthen internal communication & employee morale. • Consistent, timely response to all electronic and print media inquires, providing

accurate information and full access to appropriate City staff. • Monthly production of the public information program “Spotlight on Sparks.” • Periodic release of significant feature and news stories, photographs, and other

product to the media. • Conduct Survey of City Staff annually to determine the effectiveness of existing

internal information, programs, and publications. • Conduct error-free elections • Provide accurate & up-to-date information to City Council, City departments and

the general public.


Page 3 of 24

FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 BudgetKey Service Area/Program Revenues

City Administration 16,249 347 347 Mayor and Council Support 9,555 - - Public Information 3,185 - - Passport 71,883 40,000 45,000 Memorabilia Sales 3,188 4 4

Total 104,061$ 40,350$ 45,350$

Key Service Area/Program ExpensesMayor and Council Support 87,198$ 74,970$ 67,970$

City Administration 374,275$ 332,092$ 299,852$

Public Information 151,882$ 136,110$ 122,740$

Clerk Services 336,159 325,795 303,729 Passport 42,256 46,937 44,352 Memorabilia Sales 1,243 1,203 1,116 CM/Council Support 49,688 43,667 39,499

Total 429,347$ 417,602$ 388,696$

Fiscal Year 2010 cutbacks to be made if no employee concessions are reached. (23,746)

Total Expenses 1,042,702$ 960,773$ 855,512$

Net Cost of Providing Services 938,641$ 920,423$ 810,162$

• Financials

• Effects of Budget Cuts • Eliminated Citizen Academy and Youth Academy. • Reduced production hours for programming on Sparks Centennial Television. • Reduced public information programs for media and print relations. • Transferred liaison for Sparks Citizens Advisory Committee and Sparks Advisory

Committee for the Disabled. • Eliminated liaison to other government agencies for customer service and various

other inquiries. • Eliminated e-Better Place electronic customer service function. • Reduced ability to work on strategic planning and retreats. • Quarterly updates to the municipal code book – the goal now is to send out

updates every six months. • Update the leather bound minute books. Should be done quarterly - is overdue to

be updated. • Reduced response time for resolving Mayor and City Council issues and inquiries. • Training with departments to upgrade our agenda process has been placed on

hold. • Greatly reduced dispute resolution for customer service inquiries and complaints. • Minutes of meetings – we are now taking the 30 day time frame to get minutes

approved. Prior to the layoffs, we were able to get the minutes completed for approval every other meeting (two week time frame).

• Scanning and filing of ordinances, resolutions, and agreements delayed – with David on military leave, only the agenda packets are being scanned. Everything else is on hold. We can pull the hard copy and scan individual documents, when necessary.

• Archiving and Retention Schedule work with other departments delayed.


Page 4 of 24

• Research projects take twice as long to complete.

Councilmember Schmitt noted that we will be going backwards by not being able to maintain the scanning of documents and he asked what it is costing us in future dollars. 3.1 Administrative Services Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll discussed the Administrative Services Department as follows, outlining the activities and concerns of the department, the mission statement, key service areas, key administrative measurements, financials, and the effect of budget cuts on the department.

• Mission Statement - To support city operations by promoting a common direction through partnering, training, innovation and optimal use of available resources.

• The Administrative Service Department is made up of 4 areas: • Administrative Services Director • Governmental Affairs • Human Resources/Benefits • Information Technology

• Key Service Areas • Administrative Services Director

• Administration: Provide polices and procedures, budgeting and planning to the City of Sparks so they can provide efficient, cost-effective services to the city’s internal & external resources to the City’s benefits.

• Labor Management: Provide agreements, including contracts and resolutions, to the city’s bargaining units and non-represented groups, and resolve labor grievances. Bring contacts to Council and working with repercussions of those contracts, i.e. grievances, processes or procedures related to the labor function.

• Risk Management: Provide affordable comprehensive programs including; insurance, risk analysis, provider contracts, and safety to the City of Sparks employees. Oversees the high level parts of risk management with detail work being done by the Human Resources Department.

• Emergency Management: Provide planning and training to the City of Sparks so they can create, adopt and maintain an emergency plan through administrative support, directive and training consistent with the Incident Command System process.

• Governmental Affairs • Legislative: Manage processes and programs ensuring prompt and

effective communications and relationships with legislative partners at the local, regional, state and federal levels.

• Human Resources/Benefits • Administration: Maintain required records and documents to assist internal

& external customers, including and coordinating with the Civil Service Commission.

• Employee Service: Provide services to management and all employees so they can administer consistent and fair operations of city employee programs.


Page 5 of 24

• Recruitment: Provide recruitment and selection service of the City of Sparks, to maintain and effective highly skilled workforce. Recruitment is still going on within the City even though there has been a hiring freeze more than a year. The main recruiting being done right now is in public safety realms but there are jobs through the City Manager and through the policy of the Council that must be replaced upon vacancy.

• Labor: Provide consulting services to management and employees on the interpretation and management of employee contracts and resolutions, negotiation process and grievances. Goal is to keep all grievances to only go through the management phase.

• Training: Provide a forum for employee development, utilizing internal and external resources to employees. This has been cut back dramatically because of budget cuts but we are still doing training in response to ensure our employees have skill set improvements.

• Equal Employment Opportunity: Provide an environment that includes internal and community programs and resources to management and employees so they can celebrate diversity and promote inclusive programs.

• Benefits: To be primary liaison to city employees in reference to certain benefit packages.

• Group Health: To provide affordable compressive benefits program to city employees, a provide guidance so they and manage their benefits.

• Workers Compensation: Provide a WC program for the city so they can meet statutory claim filing requirements and regulatory reports. Also, provide prompt effective treatment of work related injuries and illness.

• Information Technology • Administration: To provide essential policies, standards and procedures

for technology use; develop and administer the budget, business and contingency plans to provide cost-effective services directly to the citizens of Sparks. Worked through ITSA Committee with representative Ron Schmitt whereby we looked at where we are, where we are going and trying to ensure we are utilizing our technology assets as appropriately as we can.

• Systems Development: Provide computer software development, project management for either in-house or purchased software systems for city departments.

• Computer Operations: Provide service and support for the city technology infrastructure including computer servers, workstations, printers, electronic mail, web sites, power systems, telephone systems, computer security, data back-up and data retention.

• Geographic Technologies: To provide, build, maintain, and support the digital base map and provide timely utility location data. Design and build GIS tools for city staff, also conduct training for the uses of Geographic Technology resources.

• Key Activity Measurements • Complete annual ICMA Performance Measurement Survey. Just completed our


Page 6 of 24

second year. • Conduct annual internal services survey. Added finance to this function this year

(it has not been included in the past). • General Liabilities Claims per 10,000 population served. • All Emergency Operation Center Employee trained: ICS 100 & 300 or above, and

NIMS (IS700). All of the City’s operations staff have completed the minimum training requirements needed to sit at the table and be an active participant if and when we have an Emergency Operations Center.

• Funds obtained for emergency management grant funding. • Coordinate federal appropriations. This has been very key as we have gone away

from the old ear-mark system to more of a “get your appropriations out”, whereby we discuss them at the department levels and work through them through the executive budget.

• Legislative platform: federal, state, and local. This allows us to take the City’s policies and procedures, puts them out and allows us to be in front of questions instead of constantly responding to them.

• Reduce employee turnover rate. • Reduce workers’ compensation claims and days lost per FTE. • Number of employee grievances & appeals per 100 employees. • Percentage of grievances resolved before passing from management control. • The employee turnover rate, workers’ compensation claims, employee grievances

and resolution of those are all key measures for the City as to how we are doing with our employees and how we are managing the other resources we have in the City.

• Total number of online payments received through city website. This brings money into the City to pay for services that we are doing without having to have additional people to handle the additional transactions.

• Number of repair calls & Help Desk calls resolved within 24 hours. This has become a little more difficult as we have been down staff for the last two years and we have continued to increase our technology use.

• Customer Satisfaction surveys are conducted by all four areas to measure the satisfaction of the services provided.

• Financials


��

��

��

Key Service Area/Program Expenses

Admin Director DivisionAdministration ��!� �"��! ��

Policy & Procedures �� !

Budget � ��"! �� " �"��

Planning �� " ��!��

�� " �� "

Labor �� " ��

Agreements ��

Grievances �� !�


Page 7 of 24

• Financials

The main thing is that over the last two years there has been a significant reduction in resources; we continue to absorb additional costs to continue doing what we have; the cost of technology continues to increase; the cost of operations continues to increase, but at the same time we have been downsizing. We have broken down the different functions that we believe are key, that are problematic, and we are working under the new measurable results with finance. In the IT area we have a jump on this as we have been keeping track of our time based on projects for a long time; we have an internal professional billing system if you will; it doesn’t do anything on the back side except keep track of where are spending our time so we make sure that we have the expertise needed to go from that; there are different technologies and sometimes we find ourselves spending a lot of time there; that becomes training opportunities for the future. Government Affairs has pretty much stayed where it has been. We did eliminate the state contract for lobbying this current year. It has been reloaded for policy decision as we get into the budget process. Interim has different things and we will have to see what the session does and the Council will then make a decision whether to continue not using that resource or to reload that one in time but it is in the budget if we need it. In Human Resources we have broken down a lot of the things we do. This is where we show we are not just as recruiting department – there is an awful lot we do day to day, and with the staff we have now, we are doing a lot of cross training so we can keep these functions up and be able to go with the staffing we have on board. One of the things we prided ourselves and are working real hard on is the group health area. We worked with the Health Committee for the changes in that plan but then we also worked with the third party providers and the doctors under

Admin Director Division FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 BudgetRisk ��"� �� !��"� ��"��

Insurance Programs

Provider ContractsHealth PlanWellnessSafety

�� "� �� !��"� ��"��

Emergency Mgmt ��!��

Planning �� !��

Training ��" ��

�� "!�!�!

Division Total 479,083$ 383,528$ 283,820$


Page 8 of 24

the consortium to make sure that we are maximizing the benefits and minimizing the costs and that is very true and a very large issue for us and workers comp. We have been fortunate in that if we compare our numbers to some of the other folks we benchmark ourselves our average claims have historically been lower than some of our sister organizations. We think this is because of the aggressive behavior and management we do up front versus waiting for things to happen.

• Financials

• Financials

• Financials

Government Affairs FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 BudgetLegislative ��

AdministrationFederal Legislative ��"�� !

# �$��%��&'��(��%��) ��!� �� ! �"�� "�

�� "��! � �� !�"�"

Division Total 471,954$ 554,806$ 539,747$

Human Resources Division FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 BudgetAdministration �� "" �� !

Policies & Procedures �� ""� ��

BudgetPlanningNDOT Rx ProgramSick Leave Bank

�� ""�� "��" "��

Employee Services ��"�� !" �� "�

EE Records �� !! ��

Class & Comp ��"��

Performance Mgmt ��

Consulting !"�� !!

Recognition �"�� "��" �"��

�� "�� !�� !� ��

Recruitment ��!" �!�� !��

Recruitment "!�� "��!�! "��

Human Resources Division FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 BudgetLabor ��! ��!� � �"�"

Agreements �!�� !��! ��!��

Grievances�� "��"�� "��

Benefits �� " ��

��*+��, ��!��

Unemployment Admin ��" ! ��! ��"

Retirement �"��" ��" ��

�� !�� !"

Training ��" �� "


Page 9 of 24

• Financials

• Financials

Human Resources Division FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 Budget

EEO ��

EEO Program ��" ��

Diversity Awareness ��

�� !"� ��"� ��

Group Health � � � ��""� �"�� !

-��$.�� !� �!��" ��!

Provider Contracts ��

Wellness ��! ��" �"��

�� !� ��!!

Workers Comp ��"� �� !�� "��"�!

ClaimsOSHA

Provider Contracts ��! ��

Return-to-Work

Prevention

�� " !��

FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 Budget

Information Technology Division ��!��

Administration �� !�� "��

Policies & Procedures

BudgetPlanning

ITSC

�� !�� "��

Systems ��

New Development ��! �� !�

Maintenance & Support

�� ! �� "!!

Operations ��!" �� "

Help Desk ��! ��

PC Support �!�"�" �� "��

Printer Support

Server Support �� "�� "��

Computer Security ��!� "�� "��

Internet/Intranet Sites ��!� ��


Page 10 of 24

• Financials

• Effects of Budget Cuts • Some department staff have voluntarily taken unpaid furloughs and forgone

management bonus and car allowances. • Loss of Emergency Management Administrator, duties reassigned. • Delay of Risk Manager, duties reassigned. • Professional service contracts eliminated and/or reduced impacting staff in human

resources, information technology and government affairs and eliminating website enhancements.

• Reduced advertising and testing abilities. • Eliminated in-house telephone support & maintenance contracts on telephones. • Delayed Technology Refresh Program, city computers are on 5 year replacement

cycle instead of 3 years and most are out of warranty. • Eliminated primary webmaster for public and intranet websites. • Increased web-based services over internet delayed.

Information Technology Division FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 BudgetNetwork �� " ��

LAN/WAN �� ""� ��"!

Network SecurityEquipment SupportTelephone SystemInternet/Intranet AccessRadio System �� " ��

�� "!�� "��"��

GT ��! ��!� �� !��

Call Before U DigBase Map ��!"! �!�! � ��

GPS Locating ��!" �"�"�� !�

��

/ �0 ��,��

��1 '2,,��

�� !��!� � "�� "��"�

Division Total 1,958,865$ 1,697,922$ 1,621,186$

3��4��2�5��6��5��*��,��$�*7 &��)

��8,�� "� �� "��! ��

Net Cost of Providing Services ��!��!"� �� "��! ��


Page 11 of 24

• Cost savings projects delayed, centralized printing & voice over IP (VOIP). • Elimination/reduction of training. • Elimination/reduction of travel. • Elimination of voluntary Cardiac Wellness program for public safety personnel. • Slower response times to employees due to reduced staffing. • Increased work load on current staff.

Councilman Carrigan asked about the Government Affairs budget regarding “Other Legislative”; lobbyist in Washington DC; and all the other activities, including all of the expenses and salaries for Rob Joiner and Kathy Clewett and the requirements. The Federal Legislative lobbyist is Anja Graves. Councilman Schmitt asked that the Government Affairs budget be a more broken down method and that the Council revisit the contracts for fiscal year 2007 and forward. Councilman Schmitt asked about the $1.7 million that needs to be cut—only management took salary concessions because they are the only employees who can do so. Councilman Schmitt has been appointed to the ITSC Committee and he voiced concerns about the drastic reductions in technology.

3.2 Finance Finance Director Tom Minton reviewed the budgets for the various functions of the Finance Department as follows: Mission Statement - Provide a full range of financial and procurement services for all city functions in accordance with all legal requirements. Continuing to be responsive to the needs of the City Government and its constituents while safeguarding and responsibly managing assets and resources.

• Key Service Areas • Administration • Accounting • Budget • Revenue • Purchasing

• Administration • Provide financial information and stewardship in all areas of financial planning,

including financial interest with outside agencies including the state legislature. Assure compliance with Federal, State and local requirements. Oversee debt & cash management.

• Accounting • Maintain and oversee the process of all accounting functions for the City of

Sparks & other related Agencies. Including A/P, A/R, Grants, and Payroll, assuring compliance with appropriate laws and accepted accounting practices. Coordinate the annual audit and preparation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR).

• Budget • Prepare and maintain all financial documents required by state statue and monitor

compliance. Provide financial analysis for all city departments and develop


Page 12 of 24

documents for Citizen review. • Revenue

• Collect and process monies related to commercial sewer, residential sewer, business, gaming and liquor license. Process all city licenses, liens on properties, and bankruptcy orders effecting the city.

• Purchasing • Assist all City departments in procurement of materials, supplies, construction

projects and services. Execute and administer contracts, assuring compliance with all appropriate codes and statues. Administer the City’s procurement card program and operate surplus property disposal program.

• Key Service Measurements • Earn the GFOA Certificate of Achievement for Financial Reporting (for annual

CAFR). • Implementation of Aggresso Accounting System. • Earn GFOA Distinguished Budget Presentation Award. • Develop Budget Process that increases department accountability & flexibility.

• Financials

• • E

ffect

• s of Budge

• Effects of Budget Cuts

• Department Director & all Mid-Mangers agreed to take unpaid furloughs. • Department work load has been reallocated with recent layoffs. Finance team

FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 BudgetFinance Administration �� " !��

Debt Administration �� !��

Cash Management "��!�� !�� !"�

Total �� ! � �� "� �!!��!!

Budget ��!!" ��"�� "��

AccountingAccounting Administration ��! �� "��

General � �� ""� ��

Total "� �� ! � ��!��

RevenueCash Management �!�� " ��" � ��

Business Licenses �� "� ��"

Bad Debt Collection �"�� !��" ��

Utility Funds !��!! "�� "��!�

Total �� "��

PurchasingDaily Procurement Support �� "�� "!

Capital Project Support � �� "��

Contract Information Management �� "�

Total ��"!� ��!��"� � "��"�

3��4��2�5��6��5��*��,��$�*7 & ��)

��8,�� "!" �� !


Page 13 of 24

has been challenged to meet deadlines but continues to give best effort. This includes department personnel working on unpaid furlough days.

Mr. Minton noted that Revenue mailed 2300 delinquent sewer bills today (696 foreclosures) and we are now filing liens every two weeks. He also noted that currently the City has $93,000,000 in cash – staff is looking at a short term CD program to increase the yield up to 2.4-2.5%. Current yield on the Long Term portfolio is 3.42%.

Councilman Schmitt asked if there could be an update on the Agresso System and why we are doing it.

General Government Mission - The mission of the General Government is to manage various activities of City government that benefit Citizens and/or all departments. The funds are used by the City Management team with the ultimate responsibility for allocation resting with the City Manager.

• Key Service Areas • Emergency Response • General Government Cost • Election Support • Community Support • Inter-governmental Support

• Financials

• Financials


Common Service Charges to other Funds �!�!�� "��"� !��!��

Key Service Area/Program ExpensesEmergency Response

�# + ��!�� !�

'��0 93��*(��,�� ""� � �

�� ""�"�� !�

General Government ��!� ��!��

City Hall Utilities �� !� ��"�"

Employment Contract Negotiation/Arbitration ��"�� "�� "�

Financial Services ��

Grant Match Program �"�� "� �� "� ��

Municipal Insurance � �� "!�

Retirement Insurance Programs �!"��"� "!��!�� !��"��

Studies ��"�� "�� "�

Transportation/Training ��! "�� "��

�� "!�� "! ��!��


Page 14 of 24

• Effects of Budget Cuts • Possible areas to cut:

• Grant Match-Will reduce departmental ability to utilize grants. • Studies – Will reduce information available to Council, Department Heads,

and the Citizens. • Donations to Non-Profits

• Other suggestions? • Membership charged to GG

Paid To: FY2007 2008 FY 2008-2009 to date

Reno/Sparks Chamber of Commerce $1,757.00 $1,757.00

Alliance for Innovation $3,900.00 $3,900.00

Nevada League of Cities $21,961.50 $22,362.25

Sparks Chamber of Commerce $825.00 $825.00

Costco Wholesale $50.75 $50.00

National League of Cities $5,193.00 $0.00

ICMA-Comparative Performance Measurement Program

$5,550.00 $0.00

Councilman Carrigan asked about $10.7 million under Financial Services – was that the implementation of Agresso. Mr. Minton noted that those are bond proceeds. Under the Retirement Insurance Program – it has almost tripled due to the Public Employee Benefits program and internal portion.

FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 BudgetCommunity Support

Donations to Non-Profits ��" ��"��" !��

Economic Development � ��

�� !��" ��"��" ��

IntergovernmentalRegional Planning Support ��"�! ��!� ��!�

SNCAT Media Program � �� " �� " ��

�� !� �"��!� �"��!�

3��4��2�5��6��5��*��,��$�*7 &"��!)

��8,�� "��


Page 15 of 24

Councilman Carrigan asked also about donations to non-profits (it was $24,000 last year and we hit a high of $82,000 in 2007) which changes every year and requested a report on what is currently being donated to whom. Mr. Carey stated that we have a policy for non-profits, but these dollars in the General Government budget are a match to support the CDBG program. A few years ago we had a time when the Council invited applications, but due to the strenuous budget recently, we have not invited applications. Councilman Schmitt asked that when the report for non-profits is done, it shows the way the request was brought to staff and the reasons why funds were given in the past.

3.3 Fire Department Fire Chief Andy Flock reviewed the budgets for the various functions of the Fire Department as follows: Mission Statement - The Mission of the Sparks Fire Department is to provide the highest level of fire prevention, fire suppression, rescue, emergency medical care, and related services to the citizens, business, and visitors to the City of Sparks, through a continuous improvement, professional development, and dedication to the community. • Business Plan Process

• Key Service Areas • Administration Division • Fire Prevention Bureau • Operations • Training & Safety

• Administration Division • The purpose of the Administration Division is to plan, administer, and coordinate

the resources necessary to ensure the cost effective and efficient delivery of Fire

��,��

:2��.��

:2*��.��;

(�<2��

:2*��.��;

=,,��,��*

=��2��# ,��

.��

=��2��

(�,��

��

.��

'> # ��,,��*

$��6��$��

��0 $��0 �$��

0 ��60 ��$

��'> # �

=��

'��

,��2��*

5��$��6��$��


Page 16 of 24

Department services. • Key Service Measures

• Provide FD facilities that are efficient, cost-effective, safe, clean and up-to-date

• Provide & maintain necessary FD records to comply with local, state, and federal requirements, regulations, & laws

• Plan and develop FD services for the prevention and management of current & future risks within the City of Sparks

• Provide a modern & technologically advanced FD through cost effective management of the department’s budget & financial resources

• Provide & manage an electronic records management system • Programs

• Personnel Management • Asset Management • Records Management • Risk Management • Budget Management • Planning and Development

• Fire Prevention Bureau • The Purpose of the Fire Prevention Bureau is to save lives and protect property

through management of our four inter-relating fire and life safety programs. • Key Service Measures

• Fire Prevention Bureau will strive to educate the public in all aspects of Fire and Life Safety.

• Fire Prevention Division will strive to inspect 100% of businesses with the Fire and Life Safety Inspection Program.

• The Fire Prevention Division (2201) will review 100% of all new construction and development plans to meet the requirements set forth in the Sparks Municipal Code and International Fire Code.

• Fire Prevention Division will conduct Cause and Origin Fire Investigations on all incendiary and suspicious fire in the community.

• Services • Public Fire Safety Education Program

• School Fire Safety • Business Fire Safety • Civic Groups • Juvenile Firesetter Intervention Program

• Fire and Life Safety Inspection Program • New Business Inspections • Annual Target Hazard Business Inspections • New Development and Construction Permit Inspections • Code Enforcement Inspections • Special Event Inspections • Convention Inspections


Page 17 of 24

• Miscellaneous Inspections • Fire Investigation Program

• Fire Cause and Origin Investigation • Misdemeanor and Felony Citations • Juvenile Firesetter Investigation

• Fire Engineering Program • Fire Plan Review • Fire Code Consultations • Fire Code Research and Adoption • Plan Review meetings

• Budget Impacts • Services & Supplies $11,050

• Tech Refresh • Printing & Promotion (effects on Public Fire Safety Education Program) • Books/Subscriptions • Travel • Repairs & Maintenance • Office Supplies

• Personnel • General Fund: • Asst. Fire Marshal (VSP Hold Feb 08 ) • Fire Inspector III (Vacant Feb 08) • Office Specialist (Transferred Sept 08) • Enterprise Fund: • Sr. Fire Plans Examiner (Eliminated) • Fire Plans Examiner (Eliminated) • Fire Plans Examiner (Never hired)

• Budget Impacts – Service Reductions • New hire background investigations • Fire inspection revenue loss • Private fire hydrant program • Administrative support (Asst. Fire Marshal & Office Specialist) • Fire plan review and associated duties • Public fire safety education program • Fire Investigations

• External Considerations • Increase in new and Target Hazard business inspections

• Large projects (RED, Kiley Ranch, Pioneer Meadows) • Growth in Sphere of Influence areas

• Future increase in new construction permits • Increased fire plan review and associated duties • Increased fire and life safety inspections

• Increase in Fire Investigations • Economy Fires • Juvenile Firesetting • Decrease in fire inspections and public fire safety education


Page 18 of 24

• Legislative Action • Additional budget reductions

• Fire Inspection Fee Increase • Operations Division

• The purpose of Operation Division is to provide effective emergency and non-emergency services that limit the loss of life and property of the citizens and residents of the City of Sparks, including mutual aid to regional jurisdictions, through good stewardship and high standards of care.

• Key Service Measures • Operations will respond to 90% of all calls for emergency services within

six minutes from time of call received. • Per NFPA 1710, place 15 personnel on scene of first alarm assignments

within 8 minutes, 90% of the time. • Annually complete fire apparatus and equipment testing as specified in the

Fire Department Business Plan. • 90% of all working incidents will be debriefed within four shifts of the

incident, and 50% will be formally critiqued at the division level within six shifts of the incident.

• Four enabling objectives to change outcomes: • Rapid response • Sufficient staffing • Proper equipment • Competent personnel

• Service Areas and Applicable Standards of Care • Fire (Structural, Vegetation, Other) - ISO Rating 2, NFPA standards of

care • Rescue (Technical, Water Entry, Ice) - NFPA 1670 • Emergency Medical Services (EMT-Intermediate) - NRS 450B, DOT • Hazardous Materials (Technician Level) - OSHA 29 CFR1910.120, NFPA

472, Regional Interlocal Agreement, Type II Response Team • Emergency Management (EOC, SFIMT’s, LTRFC) - NIIMS I-300, 400,

NWCG 310-1 • Changes to Current Budget - Four stages of reductions through 6/30/09

• Services & Supplies • Approx $144k or 45% (excludes fleet depreciation) • Personal protective equipment (200), SCBA/cylinders (77/247),

Defibrillator replacement (15), thermal imager replacements (7), monitoring equipment (25), hose

• Personnel • Approx $1.23 million or 15.5% • Seven retirements, positions not filled • Minimum daily staffing reduced from 29 to 27 in September • Minimum daily staffing reduced from 27 to 22 in December

• Anticipated Budget Changes - FY 09/10 • Services & Supplies - Status quo

• Compounded delay in replacement/repair for personal protective


Page 19 of 24

equipment, SCBA, Defibrillator replacement, thermal imager replacements, monitoring equipment, hose.

• Personnel • Additional $667k reduction • Alternatives A, B, C, D

• Alternatives A, B, C, and D • Recommended Alternative

• Alternative A • Retirements: 5-6 employees

• Additional Alternatives • Alternative B

• Zero Supplemental Staffing: engine and/or station brown-outs certain

• Alternative C • Combination of the above to reach $667,000

• Alternative D • Layoffs: 5-6 employees

• Cumulative Service & Personnel Reductions - 7/1/08 to 7/1/09 • Service Reductions

• Equipment retained longer will require more maintenance • Replacement cycle for PPE, SCBA, Defibrillator’s, thermal

imager’s, monitoring equipment, and hose will be deferred for a second year

• Personnel Reductions • 24% reduction in minimum daily staffing, call volume up 1.5 –

2.0% • More apparatus required per call for working incidents • Critical patients place engines at 2 people • Non-emergency services & projects will be proportionally reduced

• External Considerations • Legislative Action

• Additional revenue loss, budget reductions • Reduction in Mutual Aid

• Resources available, reimbursements • Possible Increase in Call Volume

• EMS • health care cost influence

• Fire • Foreclosures, insurance incentives, drought

• Training & Safety Division • The purpose of the Training & Safety Division is to plan, coordinate, and deliver

training, certifications programs, and professional development to all Sparks Fire Department employees so that they may continue to provide safe and efficient fire, rescue, prevention, and administrative services.

• Key Service Measurements • Maintain current and projected firefighting knowledge, skills, and abilities


Page 20 of 24

as identified by professional firefighting organizations, national standards, and internal audits.

• Provide and maintain Emergency Medical training to all levels as required by Fire Department policies.

• Maintain current and projected technical rescue/water rescue skills as identified by professional firefighting organizations, national standards, and internal audits.

• Maintain current and projected hazardous materials technician skills as identified by professional firefighting organizations, national standards, and internal audits.

• Develop, revise, and execute certification programs that keep pace with the growth and operational changes within the department.

• Ensure safe operations at emergency scenes and on the training ground. • Plan and develop a training records retention program that complies with

local, state, and federal requirements, regulations, and laws. • Services Provided

• Firefighting Training • Emergency Medical Program & Training • Hazardous Materials Program & Training • Technical Rescue Training • Water Rescue Training • Professional Development • Certification Programs (10) • Incident Safety Officers • Records Keeping and Retention • Promotional Examination • Assessment Center Development and Delivery • New Hire Agility Testing

• Mandated Training • OSHA – Occupational Safety and Health • NFPA – National Fire Protection Agency • ISO – Insurance Service Organization • IFSTA – International Fire Service Training Association • NWCG – National Wildfire Coordinating Group • Sparks Fire Department Policy, Rules & Regulations and Informational

Bulletins • Sparks Fire Department Emergency Operations Manual • Nevada State Law – Nevada Revised Statutes and Nevada Administrative

Code • Challenges

• Loss in years of firefighting experience • 197 years in 2008 due to retirements (7) • 269 years in 2009/10 projected retirements (9)

• Youth within the department • 7 Firefighter positions are vacant • 25 of the current 41 firefighters have 4 years or less firefighting

Minutes of the City Council Budget Workshop

experience• Average firefighting experience for these 25 firefighters is 2.6

years• “The ability to encounter incidents and to do the job right comes from knowledge.

Knowledge comes from exexperience, all you have to rely on is your training.”

• Importance of Response Time

• Firefighter FTEs per 1,000 PopulationMeasurements

•

• Budget Cuts FY08/09• 2008-09 Cuts = $1.5 Million General Fund• Total Personnel Reduction = 21.5 FTEs• 14.5 Firefighters (full time equivalents)• Senior Plans Examiner• 2 Plans Examiners• Assistant Fire Marshal• Prevention III Inspector• 2 Office Specialists

�

�

�7��

��

��

Unknown Unknown

Ignition of Fire

Discovery

Fire Response

Emergency Medical Response

Start of Medical

Emergency Discovery

City Council Budget Workshop for March 11, 2009

Page 21 of 24

experience Average firefighting experience for these 25 firefighters is 2.6 years

“The ability to encounter incidents and to do the job right comes from knowledge. Knowledge comes from experience and training. If you don’t have the experience, all you have to rely on is your training.” - Gordon GrahamImportance of Response Time

Firefighter FTEs per 1,000 Population - ICMA Center for Performance

Cuts FY08/09 09 Cuts = $1.5 Million General Fund

Total Personnel Reduction = 21.5 FTEs 14.5 Firefighters (full time equivalents) Senior Plans Examiner 2 Plans Examiners Assistant Fire Marshal Prevention III Inspector 2 Office Specialists

�7�� 7�� 7�" �7� �7��

��

��

Unknown 60 Seconds

60 Seconds

240 Seconds

120 Seconds

Notification of

Emergency Response

System

Dispatch of Emergency

Units

Turnout and Depart

Arrival at Scene

Flashover

Access

Rescue

Ventilate

Suppress

Emergency Medical ResponseNotification

of Emergency Response

System

Dispatch of Emergency

UnitsTurnout and

DepartArrival at

Scene

Biological Death

Access

Defibrillate

Medicate

or March 11, 2009

Average firefighting experience for these 25 firefighters is 2.6

“The ability to encounter incidents and to do the job right comes from knowledge. perience and training. If you don’t have the

Gordon Graham

ICMA Center for Performance

Overhaul

Secure

Flashover

Transport

Biological Death


• Minimum Staffing and Population


2000

Population 66,346

Calls for Service 5,467

Square Miles 23

Minimum Staffing 20

Inspections 1,988


• Budget Cuts FY09/10

�

��

�

��

�

��

�

��

��

.�,2��

'0 ��3��*

City Council Budget Workshop for March 11, 2009

Page 22 of 24

fing and Population

Effects of Budget Cuts

2000 2008 % Change

66,346 91,684 38.1%

5,467 7,946 45.3%

34 47.8%

22 10.0%

1,988 3,668 84.5%

Effects of Budget Cuts

Budget Cuts FY09/10

�� " ��

��

.�,2�� 2�'��

!!! �!

'0 ��3��* '0 ��?��

or March 11, 2009

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

"��

��

!��

��

��

��

��


Page 23 of 24

• $446,000 requested for FY09/10 • $221,000 reduction OT/CB • $667,000 total reduction FY09/10 • Further lowering of staff, either directly or indirectly, impacts safety to our

citizens and personnel. • Financials

Councilman Carrigan asked if City gets reimbursed for medical calls that the Fire Department responds to. Chief Frievalt noted that there is no reimbursement. Councilman Carrigan asked what it would cost to go back to 4-person engine companies. Chief Flock noted that it is between $1.6 and $1.8 million. Councilmember Ratti congratulated the Sparks Fire Department Seattle Stair Climb Team for raising $3,100 for charity and placing 7th place out of 139 teams. 4. Comments: 4.1 *From the Council and City Manager Councilmember Julia Ratti made the City Council aware that the Washoe County Senior Services Board Budget Hearing will be held on March 18th at 1:30 p.m. The County is also facing budget reductions and staff is generating a list and a possible cut is the closing of the Sparks Senior Center. A letter to the Board in support of maintaining our Senior Center will be completed to the Senior Services Board. Council member Ratti will report back to the Council at the next City Council meeting on what the Board recommends. Councilmember Carrigan thanked Debi Hunt for the answers to questions from the last budget hearing.


Adminstration 120,612 89,981 30,850

Fire Prevention Bureau 76,643 62,000 62,000

Operations Servcie Area 69,049 50,000 -

Training & Safety Total 266,304$ 201,981$ 92,850$

Key Service Area/Program ExpensesAdministration 1,111,386 947,140 915,242

Personnel ManagementAsset Management

Records ManagementRisk ManagementBudget Management

Planning & Development Total 1,111,386$ 947,140$ 915,242$

Fire Prevention Bureau 890,228 799,502 856,573 Public Safety Education 4,344 5,508 5,508

Fire & Life Safety Education 1,338 2,914 2,914 Fire Engineering Program 358 515 515 Fire Investigation Program 29,649 22,204 22,204

Total 925,918$ 830,643$ 887,714$


Page 24 of 24

5. *Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:19 p.m. >>>

Page 1 of 17

CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORKSHOP AGENDA 9:00 A.M. Monday, March 23, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 9:03:27)The workshop was called to order by Mayor Martini at 9:03 a.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 9:03:29) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, Acting City Attorney Wendy Chavez, PRESENT. City Attorney Chet Adams, ABSENT. STAFF: Neil Krutz, Debi Hunt, Wayne Webber, Stan Sherer, Tracy Domingues, Steve Driscoll, Steve Asher, Brian Bessette, Wayne Seidel, Pete Etchart, David Fitzpatrick, Armando Ornelas, Mary Jo Teston. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 9:03:53) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Salerno. *Comments from the Public (Time: 9:04:13) None. 3. Departmental Presentations for Fiscal Year 2009-2010 Budget (Time: 9:03:27)

3.0 City Works Community Development Director Neil Krutz reviewed the budgets for the various City Works departments as follows: Mission Statement & Motto - We work together to promote sustainable and fiscally sound development that preserves, protects and improves our community - “Quality from the Ground Up” Key Service Areas

• General Fund o Advance Planning o Code Enforcement o Grants Administration & Housing o Redevelopment o Economic Development

• Development Services Fund o Department Administration o Building Permit Review and Inspection o New Infrastructure Review and Inspection o Current Planning

• General Fund Advance Planning o Update City Master Plan o Maintain the City’s Annexation Program o Prepare & Implement Area Plans (e.g. TOD)

Minutes of the City Council Budget Workshop No.3, March 23, 2009

Page 2 of 17

o Participate in Regional Plan Updates o Coordinate with Regional Planning and comply with Regional Plan requirements o Prepare code amendments implementing regional and master plan polices o Provide Demographic information to the Public o Represent City on the Washoe Count HOME Consortium

• General Fund Code Enforcement o Investigate and Resolve zoning and nuisance complaints o Conduct Business License inspections o Review and approve Home Occupation and Temporary Use Permits o Conduct enforcement projects

• General Fund Grants Administration & Housing o Administer CDBG program o Assist others with seeking state and federal funding o Administer housing programs o Provide community education

• General Fund Redevelopment o Implement Town Center and Victorian Square plans o Develop and implement strategies for Redevelopment Area No. 2 o Develop capital improvement plans for both areas o Conduct workshops and briefings for Agency Board members

• General Fund Economic Development o Participation in and coordination with EDAWN, Chamber of Commerce and other

business activity associations o Assist new and existing businesses seeking to relocate/expand in Spark o Provide information (e.g. marketing and demographic) to the public, developers and

corporate site selection consultants o Create economic development strategies for the City

• General Fund Financials


Economic Development ��

Community Enhancement (Advance Planning) ��

Redevelopment Agency Support ��

Total Revenues ��

Key Service Area/Program ExpensesEconomic Development ��

Community Enhancement (Advance Planning) ��

Redevelopment Agency Support ��

Total Expenses ��

Fiscal Year 2010 cutbacks to be made if no employee concessions are reached. ��

Total Expenses ��

Net Cost of Providing Services ��

Department Costs by Category FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 BudgetBefore $1.7M cut

Salaries 948,558 827,859 519,756 Benefits 307,668 283,543 200,791 Services & Supplies 738,033 422,261 371,291

Total Expenses 1,994,259$ 1,533,663$ 1,091,838$


Page 3 of 17

• Development Services Fund Department Administration o Manage budgets and internal fiscal controls o Maintain a viable Electronic Information Management System o Provide succession planning (hampered by budget cuts) o Provide training for professional development o Administer Impact Fee Service Area No. 1 (Administered by Neil Krutz)

• Development Services Fund Building Permit Review & Inspection o Process all applications for building permits o Coordinate review and issuance of permits with other divisions and agencies o Collect all development related impact fees o Review building plans for compliance with City codes and ordinances o Inspect all building construction to ensure compliance o Respond to complaints related to building and housing codes o Provide guidance and assistance for code compliance

• Development Services Fund New Infrastructure Review and Inspection (Engineering) o Review of all development related infrastructure plans and reports

� Grading � Sanitary Sewer (outsourced to Public Works) � Storm Drainage � Roadways/Traffic

o Provide inspection and materials testing for associated construction o Review all surveying related maps and documents

• Development Services Fund Current Planning Division o Provide oversight for development review o Review and present/approve planning entitlements

� Planned Developments � Special Use Permits � Site Plan Reviews � Tentative Maps

o Check building permit applications for compliance with zoning and entitlements requirements and conduct inspections

o Zoning research and verification for financial institutions o Notice and conduct neighborhood meetings related to planning issues o Prepare specific zoning code amendments as requested by City Council

• Development Services Fund Department Financials

FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 BudgetBuilding Division

Revenues 3,412,535 ��

Expenses ��

Key Service Area Total ��

Engineering DivisionRevenues �� 278,061 ��

Expenses �� 807,953 ��

Key Service Area Total ��

��

Revenues �� 797,064 ��

Expenses �� 837,865 530,374

Enterprise Fund KSA Total ��

Total Revenues 5,884,525 3,100,196 1,904,098 Total Expenses (7,025,634) (3,900,272) (2,622,988) Transfers In (Out) (61,556) 374,958 1,274,877

Change in Net Assets ��


Page 4 of 17

Department Costs by Category FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 Budget

Salaries 3,623,244 1,957,256 1,384,710

Benefits 1,397,072 913,685 719,098

Services & Supplies 1,974,604 1,004,331 504,180

Capital (Depreciation) 30,714 25,000 15,000

Total Expenses 7,025,634$ 3,900,272$ 2,622,988$

Councilman Schmitt asked Mr. Krutz to explain the issues with Enterprise Fund spending in the good times and then requiring General Fund subsidies during the bad time. Mr. Krutz stated that there are state regulatory laws which require that the services of Community Development be provided by the City, but the Enterprise Fund cannot maintain more than 9 months of reserve funding. During the good times there was a shifting of costs to the Enterprise Fund from the General Fund and there is a basic level of service that must be provided by Building Department. There has been economical help to the General Fund in the higher income years for Community Development and now in a downturn, it is necessary that the General Fund help the Enterprise Fund to remain solvent. Councilman Schmitt noted that it is not a requirement to have an Enterprise Fund and it would be best to have only a General Fund with a stronger accounting system to follow costs to the developers. Councilman Carrigan noted that citizens don’t understand how public monies and financing works and urged that we identify the positions that should be funded by the General Fund. Development Services Fund Department Summary

Ms. Ratti asked if revenues are down because people are doing building jobs without permits. Mr. Krutz noted that we are down to only three building inspectors (vs. twelve) and chasing building code violations has never been a primary task and when times are bad, we don’t have the staff to do so, but react on a complaint basis. When the economy is strong, the inspectors are too busy to search out unpermitted work, but we do discover unpermitted work more often with twelve inspectors than with three. Councilman Schmitt asked if there is any deterrent to people pulling building permits when we are only open two days per week. Neil stated that he has met with AGC and BAN to discuss how our service hour reduction impacts them. They advised that though now they must plan their drop in visits, we are not impacting them. Mr. Schmitt stated that he is concerned about the service industry. Building inspectors still provide inspections five days a week. It is still possible for applicants to fax in their building permit applications on simple jobs like water heaters, roofs and temporary power. If they get into an emergency situation, they can fax in the application, do the work and we’ll get someone out there as quickly as possible and catch up with the paper work as we are able. Councilwoman Ratti asked for examples of things that were moved into the Enterprise Fund during the economic upswing. Mr. Krutz said that 100% of the City Surveyor’s time was


Page 5 of 17

shifted to the Enterprise Fund, and the Community Development Director’s position is 95% paid from the Enterprise Fund though he runs a department that is one-third General Fund staffed. Mr. Krutz noted, in answer to Councilwoman Ratti inquiry about funding for Code Enforcement, that it is predominantly funded by the General Fund though a portion of one officer was funded out of the Enterprise Fund for construction hour enforcement. Councilwoman Ratti then asked where the future planning is being done (not just what is building today, but rather ten years from now). Mr. Krutz stated that this has been impacted greatly by the termination of the Master Plan contract. There will be a six to nine month delay to do it in house in the General Fund. Key Service Measures • Increase in Assessed Valuation within City • Citizen Survey Results on Quality of Life • Percentage of Building Permits issued same day • Percentage of Initial Building Plan Review completed within 15 working days (currently

unable to meet this key service as there is only one (1) plans examiner now) • Percentage of inspections completed same day • Customer Satisfaction Survey Results • Employee Satisfaction Survey Results • Annual report style counting

o Building Permits o Entitlements o Lots created

The Cuts by the Numbers

• Community Development = 22 of 84 positions filled (11 salaried employees are taking furlough days to meet the budget cut requirements) o Vacancies

� 10 Management/Supervisory � 18 Professional Technical � 34 Non-Supervisory Staff

• 45% General Fund budget cut from FY08 to FY10 • Development services expenditures have been reduced to $3 million annually (63% drop)

Effects of Cuts • Master Plan Update completion delayed 6-9 months • Adoption of Final Transit Oriented Development Standards delayed 2-3 months • Adoption of East Truckee River Canyon Area Plan with be delayed for foreseeable future • Implementation of redevelopment projects (Oddie Boulevard Revitalization and

Victorian Square) will be more difficult to attain • Code Enforcement program sharply reduced and completely reactive

o Responding to complaints very slowly due to inadequate staff o Inability to respond to E-better Place Complaints

• Sharply reduced capacity to pursue economic development • TIF support for business parks in Kiley Ranch and Copper Canyon hampered


Page 6 of 17

• Very limited ability to comment on and participate in legislative activities • Expedited entitlement review eliminated • Customer Counters (Building & Planning) are open only Wednesdays & Fridays • Building Permit Review has increased from 3-4 weeks to 6-8 weeks • Building permit inspection delays Ms. Ratti stated that as the economy up, things get better throughout the functions of Community Development in every aspect except Code Enforcement. As the economy goes down, the need for Code Enforcement is increasing-and not only the number of issues, but the difficulty in pursuing those issues to resolution. The amount of time to track down an owner during a foreclosure is significant. Issues then impact law enforcement. She would like to see staff bring forward scenarios for how to fund another Code Enforcement Officer because demand for service is inverted to the economy.

Councilman Schmitt asked if the additional Code Enforcement officer would come from the General Fund and Ms. Ratti responded she is asking for staff to be creative (Redevelopment Funds, lower contingency) and bring this issue back with suggestions that the City Council might consider. Councilman Smith offered that older neighborhoods might start homeowners’ associations to help take some of the burden from the city.

3.1 Parks & Recreation Parks and Recreation Director Stan Sherer reviewed the budget for his Department as follows: Mission Statement

• To provide for the health, inspiration and recreation opportunities of the citizens of Sparks and to ensure the dedication and preservation of natural resources for high quality leisure experiences for generations to come.

Key Service Areas

o Administration - To provide direction and planning for the Parks & Recreation Department to effectively serve the community.

o Parks Division -To provide a safe, aesthetic, and functional park system for the residents of Sparks and surrounding communities.

• Recreation Division - To provide recreation/arts/culture programming and family oriented events for citizens and visitors, to enhance the quality of life in Sparks

Key Service Area Measurements

• Maintain 80% or better customer satisfaction rating. • Increase funding resources through grants/sponsorships/advertising and community

giving programs. • Maintain 85% or better usage rate of City parks by citizens. • Achieve a 90% occupancy rate for Golden Eagle Regional Park fields, March – October. • Maintain 75% direct cost recovery rate for recreation programs (recover 40% of entire

budget). • Increase revenue and offer expanded/new programming for Aquatics, Alf Sorensen

Community Center, Youth Watch, Recreation Programs, and Larry D Johnson


Community Center. Councilmen Carrigan and Smith asked if there are plans to have a dog park at Golden Eagle Regional Park. Stan Sherer advised that this could be accomplished through a master plan amendment with the Bureauidentified as a dog park is the excavated Councilman Carrigan asked how the Park impact fees are utilized. Mr. Sherer advised that these fees can only be used in the area comaintain a park. These parks are designed for pedestrian/child to easily access a park experience within half a mile of each residence.new growth therefore, have no new funding. These funds cannot be used to maintenance, only building a new park. There is currently anKeep Truckee Meadows Beautiful for more intense clean up. Councilwoman Ratti noted that she would lito address the district boundaries to recognize the older neighborhood issues. The new boundary goes out from Sparks Boulevard (west of Pyramid) now is part of District 1. It would be a recommendation to Councilman Carrigan suggested that we redraw all of the districts to update the older areas, but there needs to be an answer for the maintenance of the parks. Councilman Schmitt asked for a report of areas in the city that do not meet the half mile rule. In the park districts of Ward 1 and Ward 2, Councilwoman Ratti noted that Rock Park and Memorial Park is and so does not meet the need of a parent walking their child to play on a swing set. She asked that as the report for the areas in the city that do not meet the halfareas where a family has to cross a major roawhat the gaps are to correct them. Financials


Page 7 of 17

Councilmen Carrigan and Smith asked if there are plans to have a dog park at Golden Eagle Regional Park. Stan Sherer advised that this could be accomplished through a master plan amendment with the Bureau of Land Management. Another location that Parks has identified as a dog park is the excavated area at Pioneer Meadows.

Councilman Carrigan asked how the Park impact fees are utilized. Mr. Sherer advised that these fees can only be used in the area collected and to build a new neighborhood park, not maintain a park. These parks are designed for pedestrian/child to easily access a park experience within half a mile of each residence. The difficult issue is that areas that have no

have no new funding. These funds cannot be used to maintenance, only building a new park. There is currently an Adopt-a-Park program and Keep Truckee Meadows Beautiful for more intense clean up.

Councilwoman Ratti noted that she would like to see a BDR for the next legislative session to address the district boundaries to recognize the older neighborhood issues. The new boundary goes out from Sparks Boulevard (west of Pyramid) now is part of District 1. It would be a recommendation to include Kiley Ranch build out in District 1.

Councilman Carrigan suggested that we redraw all of the districts to update the older areas, but there needs to be an answer for the maintenance of the parks.

Councilman Schmitt asked for a report of areas in the city that do not meet the half mile rule. In the park districts of Ward 1 and Ward 2, how have they benefitted from park district fees

Councilwoman Ratti noted that Rock Park and Memorial Park is not a neighborhood park and so does not meet the need of a parent walking their child to play on a swing set. She asked that as the report for the areas in the city that do not meet the half-mile rule, add the areas where a family has to cross a major road to get to their nearest park. We need to know what the gaps are to correct them.

March 23, 2009

Councilmen Carrigan and Smith asked if there are plans to have a dog park at Golden Eagle Regional Park. Stan Sherer advised that this could be accomplished through a master plan

of Land Management. Another location that Parks has

Councilman Carrigan asked how the Park impact fees are utilized. Mr. Sherer advised that llected and to build a new neighborhood park, not

maintain a park. These parks are designed for pedestrian/child to easily access a park The difficult issue is that areas that have no

have no new funding. These funds cannot be used to maintenance, Park program and we partner with

ke to see a BDR for the next legislative session to address the district boundaries to recognize the older neighborhood issues. The new boundary goes out from Sparks Boulevard (west of Pyramid) now is part of District 1. It

include Kiley Ranch build out in District 1.

Councilman Carrigan suggested that we redraw all of the districts to update the older areas,

Councilman Schmitt asked for a report of areas in the city that do not meet the half mile rule. have they benefitted from park district fees?

not a neighborhood park and so does not meet the need of a parent walking their child to play on a swing set. She

mile rule, add the d to get to their nearest park. We need to know


Councilman Schmitt asked how much of the $678,000 in Administration costs is directly attributable to Special Events. would not impact this portion of the budget. Mr. Sherer noted that since 2000, our parks system in developed acreage has grown 83% and had a 24% decrease in staffing during that period of time. In the 2010 budget, there is no

complement for part-time workers. Councilman Schmitt asked about privatization of the maintenance for parks to save money. Mr. Sherer noted that the impact now will service levels (standards for park maintenance) not on the expense per square foot. The workers will be spending less time at each park facility, and will be unable to maintain the standard of care. The City of Reno has put out a Request for Pbut it has not been awarded.


Page 8 of 17

Councilman Schmitt asked how much of the $678,000 in Administration costs is directly Events. Mr. Sherer stated that if there were no special events, it

would not impact this portion of the budget.

Mr. Sherer noted that since 2000, our parks system in developed acreage has grown 83% and a 24% decrease in staffing during that period of time. In the 2010 budget, there is no

time workers. Councilman Schmitt asked about privatization of the maintenance for parks to save money. Mr. Sherer noted that the impact now will service levels (standards for park maintenance) not on the expense per square foot. The workers will be spending less time at each park facility, and will be unable to maintain the

The City of Reno has put out a Request for Proposals for mowing parks, but it has not been awarded.

March 23, 2009

Councilman Schmitt asked how much of the $678,000 in Administration costs is directly if there were no special events, it

Mr. Sherer noted that since 2000, our parks system in developed acreage has grown 83% and a 24% decrease in staffing during that period of time. In the 2010 budget, there is no

time workers. Councilman Schmitt asked about privatization of the maintenance for parks to save money. Mr. Sherer noted that the impact now will be on the service levels (standards for park maintenance) not on the expense per square foot. The workers will be spending less time at each park facility, and will be unable to maintain the

roposals for mowing parks,


• Effects of Current Budget Cutso Full-Time Frozen/Eliminated Positions

• Accounting Specialist• Office Administrator• Office Specialist• Administrative Secretary• Recreation Supervisor• Recreation Assistant• Park Planner • Parks Crew Leader• Parks Maintenance Worker (2)• Urban Forester

• Total: 11 Full• Part-Time Personnel Reductions

o Parks Division: 11.3 FTEo Recreation Division:

• Total: 28.2 Full• Department-wide cuts to all operating services and supplies.

o Quality of recreation programs has beeno Landscape will suffer from lack of needed

• Implemented alternative worko Decrease in services provided at

Johnson Community• Administration

o Eliminated/reduced • Direct impact to revenue generation.

• Parks Division o Eliminated Urban Forestry Program and reduced Park Ranger Program.

• De-emphasis of the maintenance of 20,000 City trees, loss of educational programs and Tree City USA certification.

• City’s liability exposure increased, and increased evidence of vandalism and graffiti.

o An 83% increase in developed park acreage from 200024% reduction in full


Page 9 of 17

ects of Current Budget Cuts Time Frozen/Eliminated Positions

Accounting Specialist (Rec Office) Office Administrator reengineered-Admin. Secretary position (Rec office)

Specialist (Rec office) Administrative Secretary (Special Events) Recreation Supervisor Recreation Assistant

Parks Crew Leader Parks Maintenance Worker (2) Urban Forester

Total: 11 Full-Time Positions Time Personnel Reductions

Division: 11.3 FTE Recreation Division: 16.9 FTE

Total: 28.2 Full-time equivalent positions wide cuts to all operating services and supplies.

Quality of recreation programs has been compromised. Landscape will suffer from lack of needed material (fertilizer, nursery stock, etc.).

Implemented alternative work schedule of 4-10’s. Decrease in services provided at Alf Sorensen Community Center, Larry D. Johnson Community Center, and Recreation Office.

Eliminated/reduced Educational Outreach, Promotion and Marketing programsDirect impact to revenue generation.

Eliminated Urban Forestry Program and reduced Park Ranger Program.emphasis of the maintenance of 20,000 City trees, loss of educational

programs and Tree City USA certification. City’s liability exposure increased, and increased evidence of vandalism and

An 83% increase in developed park acreage from 2000 to 2009 coupled with a 24% reduction in full-time staff and a 100% reduction in temporary FTE

March 23, 2009

Secretary position (Rec office)

rial (fertilizer, nursery stock, etc.).

Alf Sorensen Community Center, Larry D.

Educational Outreach, Promotion and Marketing programs

Eliminated Urban Forestry Program and reduced Park Ranger Program. emphasis of the maintenance of 20,000 City trees, loss of educational

City’s liability exposure increased, and increased evidence of vandalism and

to 2009 coupled with a time staff and a 100% reduction in temporary FTE


Page 10 of 17

($536,000). o Severe impact to the maintenance of the City’s Park System. o

• Recreation Division o Eliminated non-revenue generating programming for seniors and youth.

• Direct impact to at-risk populations who are in most need of programming. o Reduced hours of operation at Sparks Marina Park, Deer Park and Oppio Park

pools. • Reduction of affordable recreational swimming and swim lessons for children.

• Impact of Future Budget Cuts o Loss of projects to be funded through Franchise Fee revenue.

Councilman Carrigan noted that this morning on three radio stations the word is that Sparks is cutting Special Events, including Farmers’ Market. Mr. Sherer stated that the last thing the Parks Dept. wants is to close the market and until the City Council says otherwise, the Special Events full calendar will be continuing. With the escalation of the public safety costs, production of Farmer’s Market has sky rocketed. Over the past three years, the event is self-sufficient with the subsidy from TOURMARK. This requires sponsorships and if irresponsible parties are saying the calendar is compromised, it will make it much more difficult to continue to gain sponsors. Mr. Sherer stated that the philosophy is that we will have a full calendar of events; we will solicit support from the community in order to maximize the returns to make them sustainable. Councilman Carrigan asked Mr. Sherer to meet with our Public Information Officer and get the word out that we are not cancelling our Special Events. Councilman Smith noted that the branding effort has already been paid for. The RSCVA reduced most of their funding for Special Events and TOURMARK was pretty much the sole supplier of funding. We have no intention of cancelling our events. Councilman Schmitt asked that we document every penny that goes to Special Events from taxpayers (property taxes, etc.) and to quantify the returns of Special Events. Then we can go out to the radio stations and tell them that the taxpayers are paying for the events. Additionally, he asked that a report quantify economic impact that the Special Events have on our community. Mr. Sherer stated that the missing item is trying to quantify what economic impact those events have on our community. That is something we tried to do with help from the RSCVA and the support wasn’t there. We would have to hire someone to help with this. Hot August Nights say that they generate $351 million in the region – what does that mean to us? What is a worthwhile investment based upon those events? Mr. Schmitt stated that we can be very successful at running special events, but the bottom line is we only get what is left over. With our budget cuts, we give up $200,000 over the next two years, so we have to be 200% to 300% more successful to get what’s left over. Councilwoman Ratti suggested that we reach out to the University to help with quantifying the return on our special events.


Page 11 of 17

Stan Sherer noted that the general fund transfer in is expected to be at $4.6 million in 2009-10 compared to the current budget (2008-09) which was $5.6 million. We’ve launched a new program called Partners in Recreation and we see growth. Mr. Sherer discussed the decline in numbers for our before and after school and daycare programs. Concern was expressed that thee is not enough information out there regarding “scholarships” and sliding fee scales for these youth watch services. This program is supported through the Mayor’s Cup Golf Tournament and other sponsorships. The urban forestry program has been eliminated. There are over 20,000 trees in the city and service on an as-needed-basis will be provided, which will cause us to lose our Tree City USA certification for the first time in 15 years. Councilman Schmitt expressed concern about the elimination of the graffiti program and that increased graffiti incidents doesn’t really save any money. Mr. Sherer noted we are the only entity in the area that has not shut down our pools, although we have cut back the hours they are open. Mr. Sherer noted that 1/3 of the new franchise fee goes to Parks and Recreation and their budget would look quite different if it were not for these funds. He noted they were able to transfer two employees to this fund in order to maintain our parks. A brief discussion was held regarding the Senior Center. It was noted that the City maintains the outside of the building and Washoe County maintains the inside and is responsible for the programming. The County pays for 1.75 employees to man the building and many of the programs are run by volunteers.

3.2 Public Works Public Works Director Wayne Seidel and Deputy Public Works Director Pete Etchart reviewed the budgets of the various Public Works Divisions as follows: Public Works (General Fund)

• Mission Statement o To manage public infrastructure, the environment and growth for the community

to meet its need and expectations with pride and professionalism. • Key Service Areas

o Administration o Capital Projects o Transportation Services o Maintenance o Utility * o TMWRF *

� *100% Non-General Fund • Administration - Goal

o To provide leadership, vision and support services for the Public Works


Page 12 of 17

Department. • Key Services Measurements

o Submit all Annual Reports, Business Plans, Budgets, and Final Capital Improvement Project list (CIP) by designated dates.

o Maintain fiscal internal controls by reviewing all processing proposals, invoices, and contract Payments.

o 75% of transaction processes responded to and resolved within 60-days of receiving request in Property Management.

o Annual update of Sustainability Action Plan. • Capital Projects - Goal

o The purpose of the Capital Projects Division is to implement infrastructure projects for the benefit of citizens, visitors, and businesses in the City of Sparks. The Capital Project Division will accomplish this in the most courteous, convenient, and cost effective manner.

• Key Service Measurements o Percentage of CIP projects completed or encumbered by fiscal year end (June

30th). o Total number of projects initiated and completed. o Total value of projects initiated and completed. o Percentage of project completed under or within budget. o Total number of Development projects inspected by Public Works Inspectors. o Total number of Development projects inspected by Contracted Inspectors. o Total number of projects inspected by Public Works Inspectors. o Total number of projects inspected by Contracted Inspectors. o Total cost of Contracted CIP Consultant Inspection services. o Total cost of Contracted Development Consultant Inspection services.

• Transportation Services – Goal o To provide and maintain the public right-away for the safe and efficient

movement of people and goods. • Key Measurements

o 0% of roadway inspection surveys over 3-years old. o 0% of roadway segments in pavement management program over 3-years old. o 12% of residential roadways receiving maintenance treatment. o 75% customer satisfaction rating on residential roadway quality. o Permits reviewed and approved and/or rejected for correction within 72 hours. o All permanent patches installed within four weeks of street cut during months hot

plant is in operation. o Evaluate and re-time (if required) one-third (1/3) of the city’s traffic signals on a

yearly basis. o 50% customer satisfaction rating on traffic signal timing. o Maintain a 70% or better on the ITE National Report Card. o Traffic Calming Customer Satisfaction Rating to be at or above 75%.

• Maintenance Division - Goals o Maintain roadways to a condition that will provide safe and efficient movement of

motorist and pedestrians. o Provide uninterrupted sanitary sewer, storm drain and reclaimed water service


Page 13 of 17

while protecting public heath and safety within the community. o Provide safe and reliable vehicles /equipment used in the daily delivery of City

Services. o Provide safe, clean, and comfortable facilities for use by the general public. o Improve community appearance through effective Graffiti Removal &

Identification. • Key Service Area Measurements

o Percentage of local roadway network crack sealed annually. o Percentage of Priority 1 and Priority 2 roads cleared within 6-hours during

average snow storms. o Percentage of traffic signals maintained annually. o Percentage of city streets striped annually. o Percentage of crosswalks and legends painted annually. o Percentage of sanitary sewer system cleaned annually. o Percentage of streets swept every 30 days. o Percentage of catch basins cleaned annually. o Number of effluent system valves exercised: New performance measure for 2008. o Percentage of sanitary sewer system televised and assessed annually. o Percentage of storm drain system televised and assessed annually. o Percentage of equipment receiving preventative maintenance annually. o Percentage of unscheduled repairs completed within 2 days of parts delivery. o Percentage of city buildings painted annually. o Percentage of designated city facilities cleaned 2 times per week. o Percentage of city facilities inspected annually. o Percentage of graffiti incidents responded to within 3 days. o Percentage of reported abandoned shopping carts picked up and returned within

24 hours. FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 Budget

Key Service Area/Program RevenuesAdministration Management & Support - 30 - Sustainability Utility Management- Traffic Signals (6,820) - - Signal Maintenance 94,882 100,000 - Support of Pavement Management Fund 85,382 418,785 428,467 Support of Utility Administration 237,749 443,520 481,875 Total 411,193$ 962,335$ 910,342$

Key Service Area/Program ExpensesAdministration

Department Management & Support 113,774 125,728 127,570 Total 113,774$ 125,728$ 127,570$

Finance & Budget 115,528 113,671 115,111 Total 115,528$ 113,671$ 115,111$

Communication 11,913 10,494 10,676 Total 11,913$ 10,494$ 10,676$

Property Management 63,943 69,907 70,384 Total 63,943$ 69,907$ 70,384$

Sustainability 36,201 41,568 41,729 Utility Management- Street Lighting 883,922 943,407 990,578 Utility Management- Street Utilities 102,837 109,955 115,453 Utility Management- Traffic Signals 154,516 165,996 174,296 Utility Management- C Street Park ing Garage 38,087 55,143 55,089 Utility Management- Theater Park ing Garage 99,502 69,976 71,059

Total 1,315,065$ 1,386,045$ 1,448,204$ Division Total 1,620,223$ 1,705,845$ 1,771,946$


Page 14 of 17

• Financials

• Financial Summary


Capital Projects DivisionCapital Improvement Program 349,313 330,073 306,847 Total 349,313$ 330,073$ 306,847$

Inspection Program 70,543 64,450 60,752 Total 70,543$ 64,450$ 60,752$

Division Total 419,856$ 394,522$ 367,599$

Transportation ServicesPavement Management 26,836 28,134 25,468 Total 26,836$ 28,134$ 25,468$

Traffic Engineering Division 422,110 359,759 290,978 Total 422,110$ 359,759$ 290,978$

Division Total 448,946$ 387,894$ 316,446$

Maintenance DivisionMaintenance Administration 194,500 185,903 186,434 Pavement Maintenance 1,519,543 1,217,145 1,058,254 Total 1,714,043$ 1,403,048$ 1,244,688$

Traffic SafetySignal Maintenance 526,779 529,889 412,255 Street Striping 337,106 313,804 247,249 Pavement Mark ings 133,105 95,269 44,186

Total 996,990$ 938,962$ 703,690$


Facility Maintenance & Cleaning 826,360 747,626 654,095 Total 826,360$ 747,626$ 654,095$

Community Appearance 206,474 182,083 135,491 Total 206,474$ 182,083$ 135,491$

Division Total 3,743,867$ 3,271,719$ 2,737,964$

Support of Other FundsPavement Management (Road Fund) 486,369 453,453 383,106 Maintenance Facility Utilities (Parks & Recreation) 1,561 2,294 2,411 Utility Maintenance (Sewer OM Fund 1630) 1,757 2,583 2,714 Condition Assessment (Drains OM Fund 1640) 1,463 2,151 2,261 Vehicle Maintenance (Motor Vehicle Fund 1702) 683 1,004 1,055 Utility Engineering and Support - Administration 459,139 435,225 427,629 Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation-Administration 78,276 76,850 77,970 Total 1,029,248$ 973,559$ 897,146$

Fiscal Year 2010 cutbacks to be made if no employee concessions are reached. (164,327)

Total Expenses 7,262,140$ 6,733,539$ 5,926,774$

Net Cost of Providing Services 6,850,947$ 5,771,204$ 5,016,432$

FY08 Audited FY09 Estimate FY10 BudgetDepartment Costs by CategoryBefore $1.7M cut

Salaries 2,896,127 2,301,277 1,860,367 Benefits 1,091,900 963,247 839,658 Services & Supplies 3,274,113 3,469,015 3,391,076

Total Expenses 7,262,140$ 6,733,539$ 6,091,101$


Page 15 of 17

Mr. Etchart noted that utility expenses account for almost a quarter of our general fund public works budget. They have an aggressive action plan to reduce expenditures with regard to street lights and traffic signals. This includes eliminating unnecessary street lights; putting timers on selected street lights; and converting to LED lights. He suggested that these costs would benefit from being tracked separately from the rest of the public works budget.

• Public Works Budget Structure o Revised FY 09/10 Projection: $5,926,774

� $1,280,327 - Street Lighting, Traffic Signals & Right-of-way Utilities (22%)

� $126,148 - Parking Garages (2%) � Public Works: 9.6%* of Sparks General Fund Budget � * 7.3% excluding R/W Utility Costs

o Transition from General Fund to Enterprise Funding � Current Staff - �90% funded by non-General Fund Sources � 15.5 FTE positions in General Fund

• 175 authorized positions, 150 filled positions • Reduced from 27.2 FTE positions in January 2009 Budget

Reductions � Revised 09/10 Budget Projection is $807,000 less than the FY 08/09

Budget Projection � Revised 09/10 Budget Projection is $1,335,000 less than the Audited

FY 07/08 Budget

Mr. Etchart noted that they have reached the minimum critical staffing levels in public works. He discussed plans to replace some of the temporary street maintenance workers who were laid off with three permanent workers under the CIP budget. He also outlined the plans for pooling street and parks maintenance crews on a seasonal basis.

• Maintenance Division - Effects of Budget Cutbacks o Building Maintenance (3 GF employees)

� 1985: 55,424 square feet/employee � 2009: 246,869 square feet/employee

o Roadway Public Safety Striping (1 GF employee) � 1985: 3.5 employees – 368 lane miles � 2009: 1 employee – 665 lane miles

o Graffiti Program (1 GF employee) � Reduced from 2 to 1 employees in 2009

o Electrician/Traffic Signal Maint. (2 GF employees) � 1985: 3.5 employees - 51 traffic signals � 2009: 2 employees – 115 traffic signals

o Street Maintenance (3 GF employees) � 1985: 73.6 lane miles per employee � 2009: 166.3 lane miles per employee

• Loss of 11 temporary worker positions o Reduced ability to respond to snow events and public emergencies


Page 16 of 17

o Pooled Maintenance Staffing

3.3 FY 2009-2010 Capital Improvement Program Mr. Etchart reviewed the impacts of the budget cutbacks and commended staff for their efforts in do more with less. Admin., Capital Projects, Transportation (5.5 GF employees)

• Effects of Budget Cutbacks o Further prioritization of CIP Projects o Reduced ability to obtain and manage grants including stimulus funding o Elimination of Traffic Calming Public Safety Program o Reduced ability to manage transportation and roadway network and adequately

coordinate with other agencies including RTC, NDOT o Reduced ability to respond to emergencies

Mr. Seidel reviewed the CIP by fund and responded to questions and concerns from Council. Mr. Etchart noted that they have 15 projects they are looking at under the stimulus program and one of them is to replace the yellow light bulbs in traffic signals with more a energy efficient type bulb (we have already replaced the red and green bulbs). The biggest sources of funding we are looking at from the federal government are energy efficiency and conservation block grants. Council requested that staff report at one council meeting a month on what is happening with the stimulus money, what projects Sparks has applied for and what we expect to actually receive. Council Member Salerno asked if the call stations at the Marina were working. Parks Operations Superintendent Brian Bessette noted that due to the continued construction on the east side of the Marina, we don’ t have a reliable power source, so the call stations are currently in storage. The funding in the CIP is to purchase and install a fourth station. Council Member Ratti asked for an update on the proposed lighthouse at the marina. Mr. Seidel stated that donations in the amount of about $100,000 have been received, but we need an additional $125,000 in funding to complete the project. The funds are in the CIP as a “ place holder” until we get more funding. A discussion was held regarding Park Districts; how funds are collected; how funds can be expended; and how the City could change the way funds must be spent, per the legislature. Mr. Seidel then discussed the budgets for the Sewer Fund and the Motor Vehicle fund. 4. Comments:

4.1 *From the Council and City Manager None. 5. *Adjournment There being no further business, the workshop was adjourned at 11:55 a.m.


Page 17 of 17

>>>

Page 1 of 21

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 3:00 P.M. Monday, March 23, 2009 City Council Chambers Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:04:00 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:04 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:04:05 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt (left at 4:55 p.m.), City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:04:38 p.m.) The invocation was given by Pastor Brad Dyrness from the Sparks Church of the Nazarene. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:06:05 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Julia Ratti. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:06:34 p.m.) Mayor Martini noted that some of the people in the audience were present because of an announcement by one of the radio station that Sparks was cancelling all of our events. He made it clear that this was not true—we were not cancelling any of our special events. Mr. Ronald E. McGee, expressed concern regarding the rumor that the Senior Center in Sparks was going to close. He said he was happy to find out the rumor was not true. He also expressed concern regarding a recent interaction he had with the Sparks Police Department and the inexperience of some of our officers. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:11:20 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. Council Member Schmitt asked that Item 6.9 be pulled from the agenda until further notice. He said there are upcoming meetings at which this issue will be discussed and, hopefully, these discussions will provide a solution to the problem. He said we should hear from our City Attorney regarding our legal standing on this matter, so we are better informed, but that any decision should be delayed until we have met with the other entities involved. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting for March 23, 2009

Page 2 of 21

3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: (Time: 3:14:03 p.m.) 3.1 Regular Meeting of March 9, 2009 A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 9, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Presentation –Safe & Sober Graduation Night Party (Time: 3:04:57 p.m.) Ms. Susan Koonce, Vice President of the Sparks High School Boosters Club, introduced Olivia Clune, 2005 Sparks High Alumni, Yolanda Newsom, next year’s student body president and Daniel Squire, the current student body president. She presented the plans for the Safe and Sober Graduation Night and noted that a lack of funding could seriously curtail their plans to keep costs low so that all students who wish to do so can attend. She appealed to the Council to consider contributing funds toward this event so that they can maintain their record of no alcohol related fatalities on graduation night in Washoe County for the last four years. Council Member Schmitt asked if the city charged the boosters for their use of the Alf Sorenson Community Center for this event and whether it would affect their budget if the City donated the use of the center. Ms. Koonce stated the City did not charge a great amount for the facility, but that any amount would help. Mr. Schmitt stated that the City has a formal procedure for non-profit organizations to request funds from the City and asked that the City Clerk provide this information to Ms. Koonce for the future. He also asked that Ms. Koonce provide the costs of using the Alf Sorenson facility to the City Manager for evaluation and possible waiving of those costs. Mayor Martini remarked that this is a tough time to ask for money and perhaps individual council members would be able to donate. Council Member Ratti asked where donations could be made. Ms. Koonce asked that donations be sent to the Sparks High School Boosters in care of Sparks High School, 820 15th Street, Sparks, Nevada 89431. Council Member Carrigan asked how much the Boosters needed for their party. Ms. Koonce stated that last year the party cost $10,000 and to date, they have only raised $3,000. They are hoping to be able to raise an additional $7,000 or more. Mayor Martini announced to anyone present for discussion of 6.9, the overpayment of tourism and marketing funds to the City by the RSCVA, that this item had been pulled from the agenda and would not be discussed at today’s meeting.

4.2 Presentation – Washoe County School District Issues (Time: 3:20:45 p.m.) Washoe County School District Superintendent Paul Dugan discussed the current state of the School district and some of the major challenges facing the school district in the future. He emphasized a declining graduation rate and what they can do to increase opportunities for obtaining a high school diploma for students that are credit-deficient.


Page 3 of 21

(Time: 3:37:36 p.m.) Mayor Martini invited members of Boy Scout Troop 576 to introduce themselves. The troop was attending the meeting as a requirement for the citizenship in the community merit badge. 5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:39:50 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.6. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


transfers for the period February 19, 2009, through March 4, 2009 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.


Beverage Package license for Longs Drug Stores, California, LLC, dba Longs Drug Store #3948, located at 2878 Vista Blvd., Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Thomas Swift Moffatt

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for an Alcoholic Beverage Package License for Longs Drug Store #3948. Longs Drug Stores has merged with CVS Caremark Corporation. Mr. Moffatt is the Secretary/Vice President of Corporate Law for CVS Pharmacy Inc. The license will provide a $700.00 annual fee plus $1.00 per $1,000.00 over $25,000.00 annually and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.


Beverage Package license for Longs Drug Stores, California, LLC, dba Longs Drug Store #9170, located at 2300 Oddie Blvd., Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Thomas Swift Moffatt

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for an Alcoholic Beverage Package License for Longs Drug Store #9170. Longs Drug Stores has merged with CVS Caremark Corporation. Mr. Moffatt is the Secretary/Vice President of Corporate Law for CVS Pharmacy Inc. The license will provide a $700.00 annual fee plus $1.00 per $1,000.00 over $25,000.00 annually and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.


Alcoholic Beverage license for La Rioja, located at 185 E. Glendale Ave., Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Salvador Armando Rico-Rivas

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for an On Premises Alcoholic Beverage License for La Rioja. This business is in the location of the former Grinder’s Switch Deli. The license will provide a $1,000.00 annual fee plus $1.00 per $1,000.00 over $50,000.00 annually and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.


Page 4 of 21

5.5 Consideration and possible approval for the purchase of replacement Motor Control Center #3 at Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility, Bid #08/09-018 to KBL Associates of Hayward, California, in the amount of $37,000

An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel and Treatment Plant Maintenance Superintendent Alan Minor recommending the Council award to KBL Associates, the bid for the purchase of a replacement motor control center. This is one of the original motor control centers installed when the treatment plant was built in 1964. This center supplies power to numerous pieces of equipment. During recent inspections and preventative maintenance tasks it was discovered that components of this control center have deteriorated. The inability to readily acquire necessary parts for repair makes it necessary to replace the entire motor control center with current technology. Funds are available for this purchase.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval of Consultant Services Agreement with

Wood Rogers for the TMWRF Effluent Pump Station Modifications and Upgrades Project in the amount o f $55,250

An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel and Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas recommending the Council approve an agreement with Wood Rogers. The contract will provide final construction documents for manifold modifications, pump control valve installation, upsized jockey pump installation, and will also provide bid and construction support for effluent surge protection project at the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility (TMWRF). Funds were budgeted and are available for this contract.

6. General Business: (Time: 3:40:35 p.m.) Mayor Martini requested that item 6.6 be moved and heard as the first general business item.

6.1 Consideration and possible approval of donation by Desert Fire Protection of wood carving and fence at Fire Station 2 (Time: 3:43:05 p.m.)

Fire Chief Andy Flock introduced Firefighter Rich Armstrong, who provided the history of the wood carving of a firefighter holding a child, accompanied by a Dalmatian. Chief Flock recognized all the citizens and city departments that contributed to the creation and set up of this art project and the Council expressed their thanks to all the contributors. Mr. Armstrong displayed photos of the finished wood carving and recognized the artist who did the wood carving, Mr. Tim Carmen. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to accept the donation of a firefighter carving and fencing for Fire Station No. 2. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.2 Consideration and possible acceptance of the COPS Office Funding in the

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Time: 3:51:20 p.m.) Police Chief Steve Asher explained that the COPS Office is anticipating receiving funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 which will allow local law enforcement to apply for grant funds to hire additional police officers in order to increase their community policing capacity and crime prevention efforts. He then presented facts and figures to support


Page 5 of 21

the hiring of additional entry level police officers if Sparks receives grant funding. He noted that these positions would be funded at 100% for salaries and benefits for these officers, but at the end of the 36 months, the City of Sparks would be required to retain and fund all sworn officer positions awarded under the grant. Chief Asher stated this is an opportunity to apply for additional officers. He said there was no cap on the number of officers we could apply for, but the awards may be limited, depending on the number of agencies that also apply for these funds. Chief Asher said that in working with the Finance Department, they have determined that we could support 10 officers in four years, after the funding goes away. He noted we currently have 110 sworn officer positions, six of which are frozen at this time. We would fill the six frozen positions and add four additional officers. We are currently at 1.22 per cop per 1000 citizens and increasing sworn officers to 120 would put us at 1.33 officers per 1000 citizens. Chief Asher then described how the officers would be utilized within the department. Chief Asher noted that there would be some upfront costs to the City, even though we would be receiving the majority of the funds from the grant. Those cost, for the first year, would be approximately $121,350 and includes equipment for the officers and about $3,000 in overtime, callback pay, and shift differential. The City would also be responsible for cost of living increases (COLAs) and PERS benefit payments. Chief Asher stated he is aware that this is a bad time to ask the City for funds, but it would be a way for the Police Department to continue to provide services to our citizens. Police Chief Asher stated that he is looking for direction from the Council as to the number of officers they should apply for and directed them to review the anticipated costs to the City for 10, 15, and 20 officers. Council Member Smith asked how long it would take to get these officers fully trained, after the funds are approved. Chief Asher said it would take at least a year to get the officers on the streets and working by themselves. Under this grant, we would attempt to get them fully trained by next summer. Council Member Smith noted that currently the police academy is not holding classes. Chief Asher stated that was correct—all three local entities decided to hold off on the next session of the academy until this grant comes through and if the funds come in, they will start an academy in September. Council Member Carrigan stated we need additional officers and this is a good opportunity; however, he had concerns regarding our ability to fund the officers after three years. He also asked when the three years started—when we hire the officers or when the grant request is approved. Chief Asher stated the deadline for applying for the grant is April 24th and that is probably when the time limit would start. Finance Director Tom Minton stated he was not sure, but the time line could start with the federal fiscal year, which is October 1st to September 30th. He stated that in order to fund the additional officers after three years, he is proposing that we


Page 6 of 21

use some of the fund balance for the local sheriff costs in fiscal year 10/11 and then set aside additional money so that it is there for fiscal year 12/13. Council Member Schmitt expressed concern that if we apply for 10 officers, we might only receive funding for five. He felt that we should apply for 20 officers in hopes of getting 10. He also noted that this would be a good time to work on obtaining a dedicated source of revenue, such as a quarter percent sales tax increase approved by the voters, for funding additional police officers in the future. Council Member Ratti asked if the City’s share of costs for these officers was in the budget, or are we looking for an enhancement to the police budget. Mr. Minton stated staff is asking to enhance the police budget from fiscal fund balance in 2010. She also asked what community activities would be restored through this funding. Chief Asher stated if we received 10 officers through the COPS program, they would put three officers back into the community affairs programs. Ms. Ratti asked what the consequences would be if the economy did not turn around and we were unable to retain all of the officers hired under this grant. Chief Asher stated there is a very stringent report cycle for this grant and if we default under any portion of the reporting cycle, all future funding would be denied. Ms. Ratti asked if we would have to pay the money back if we defaulted under the terms of the grant. Deputy Police Chief Steve Keefer that giving the money back could be one of the stipulations and we could damage our ability to receive any further federal funding for any other programs as well. He said that is why we need to make as accurate a prediction as possible regarding our ability to retain those officers in four years. Mayor Martini asked if we could apply for 15 officers in the hopes of getting 10 and then if we were approved for all 15, say we only needed 10. Deputy Chief Keefer stated that could damage our relationship for other government funding. Council Member Smith asked if we would be applying for 10 officers. Chief Asher stated that is what they are asking the Council for direction on. He said Finance Director Tom Minton has determined that we can support 10 officers for sure; however, they are willing to submit for 15 or 20 officers, if that is the direction from Council. He said money is the issue and the staff report outlines the anticipated costs. Council Member Smith asked if we had to guarantee someone a job for three years. Chief Asher explained that it was the position, not the person, and if someone were hired and failed to meet the expected standards then they could be let go and another person hired. Deputy Chief Keefer stated that the only requirement is that after the 36 months, the City must retain those positions for 12 months afterward. After that it is up to the Council whether they want to continue to fund those officers. Council Member Smith commented that he would like to see us apply for 15 officers. Council Member Schmitt stated that if we ask for 20 new officers, we are risking that in four years we have to come up with a million dollars; however, the chances of asking for 10 and getting all 10 are fairly slim—we have a better chance of putting in for 20 and getting 10.


Page 7 of 21

Council Member Ratti said the risk is not to the Police Department, but to other city departments, because if we apply for and get 20 officers, we make a commitment to support those 20 officers. If our revenues do not recover in four years, then the money has to come from other departments. However, public safety is our number one priority and she felt that we should take the risk and ask for 15 or 20 officers. We should also become very proactive about pursuing some type of dedicated revenue source for funding law enforcement. Chief Asher said that they are pursuing a quarter cent sales tax initiative to assist with these costs and augment the force in the future. Council Member Carrigan said he is not comfortable with asking for 15 or 20 because we are only sure we can afford 10. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the application for 20 police officers through the COPS Office funding in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Carrigan, NO. Motion carried.



Government Affairs Analyst and Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll reported on the activity at the Legislature this past week as follows:

• AB422 – the STAR Bond bill—along with AB458, Speaker Buckley’s bill for funding schools and tax abatements

o When the bills were being presented, Speaker Buckley was very clear that things were put in the bills that were not originally intended; however, they did not have time to clean up the language before the deadline for introducing bills. They will continue to clean up the language in both bills.

o Concern was expressed that the bill says that businesses within the entire city, not just within the redevelopment district cannot relocate to a STAR Bond District.

o Important to have the support of the Council for AB458 with regard to seeking changes to the bill—we should not remain neutral on this.

o As one of the two agencies who have used this tool, it is important that we have input into how to change the bill to protect our Redevelopment Agency and STAR Bond projects.

o The redevelopment bill is proposing to exempt the operating rate of schools from current redevelopment agencies—at a rate of about $.80 this would be a $1 million impact to Area I and $600,000 impact to Area II. Although the bill leaves 75% [of tax increment], that 75% excludes schools, which means about a 33% reduction in what we end up with for STAR Bonds.

o Ratti - it is important that our current Redevelopment Areas and STAR Bond District stay whole; therefore, direction to staff would be to try to amend the language to affect only future projects, so that it will not affect any bonds that we have already issued. Less concerned about future ability to do a future STAR Bond project, than about our STAR Bond project remaining viable. “We played


Page 8 of 21

by the rules as they existed, when we set up the district and it was not right to changes the rules in the middle of the game.”

o Carrigan - Are we “grandfathered” into the bill? Some of the provisions in the bill would not allow the DDA (Disposition

and Development Agreement) that we entered into with RED Development to be fully executed.

Relocation of stores after July, 2009. We need clarification on several provisions with regard to the current

RED agreement. o Schmitt – concern that elements of this bill could have unintended consequences.

Driscoll – bills restrict tax increment financing – there is the danger that they will erode the ability to use this type of financing in the future – the less increment available, the less we can do.

Make sure that the State does not take away the local entity’s ability to do economic development.

o Schmitt – motion to promote changes that would protect our redevelopment and STAR Bond districts and to also promote changes that do no harm to any regulations that would stifle economic development.

Second by Smith for discussion o Carrigan – if we are talking about AB458- they want to take away part of the

redevelopment tax increment that we currently receive and give it back to the school district.

Carey – it is also in AB422– section 8.1(a)(1), which is in conflict to the prior section of the bill – it seems to say that education taxes can be pledged only for bonds or to refinance bonds issued prior to passage of this bill.

o Carrigan – is this grandfathered? Carey – I read the bill as being in a position of restricting future bonds in

our STAR Bond district which have yet to be released on the legends project. Existing bonds appear to be fine. In our contract with RED (the DDFA) we have future bonds which we are obligated to issue if they generate the sales taxes for them. As it is written, it appears to change the rules under which our STAR Bond district was created in mid stream and it could affect a second, third, and fourth phase of STAR Bonds.

o Ratti – The motion made by Schmitt is broader than she is comfortable with. Suggested that direction to staff—for the bills as they pertain to STAR Bonds and redevelopment districts—should be that any contract, agreement, etc., that is underway should be protected. In area II we have a DDA with RED development and that should not be messed with. However, in downtown Victorian Square, we should be able to absorb any amendments because we don’t have a development agreement or contract with a developer.

o Schmitt – concerned about unintended consequences—places where we don’t have contracts in place, but where the legislation could hurt our ability to create future projects. Don’t let the State dictate what we can do at a local level.

o Geno – if we don’t put up some type of resistance, we are going to get more than we bargained for. There are some amendments that we can probably live with,


Page 9 of 21

but others we can’t and we need to make our position known. It is going to affect Kiley and Copper Canyon and if we don’t put up a fight. The Legislature is looking to take more and more of our tax increment. Economic development should be more up to us than the state of Nevada. We have created a project because we were allowed to do so within the law, and the State can’t come back and say that was not their intention. Well, I’m sorry, but if that was not your intention, then you should have made it part of the law.

o Schmitt – one problem is that we are calling something a failure and we have not even given it a chance to succeed. We have only been open six months and it unfair to say we have failed.

o Geno - does everyone understand the motion? o Ratti – this is a really broad motion. The two bill drafts deal specifically with

STAR Bonds and redevelopment districts. Can’t support the part of the motion that says the City of Sparks should charge down there and make sure there is no harm to any economic development tools… it is just too broad. We should take a very strong position on protecting our current STAR Bond and redevelopment district commitments because they are in specific response to these bills. Amend the motion to make it more specific… to say we will give direction to staff to take a strong stance on protecting the current STAR Bonds and redevelopment facets specific in these bills and to bring back other legislation that may affect other economic development tools.

o Schmitt - Could amend his motion if we add one other thing: that any additional bonds that we need to issue in the future for either in our redevelopment or STAR Bond districts, are also grandfathered in.

o Ratti – I am okay with that. o Carrigan – I can support this amendment. o Geno – does the second agree to the amendment? o Smith – I’ll agree. o Carey – one other thing I would appreciate is the authorization to work on the

mechanics of applying both 422 and 428 – we have direct knowledge of STAR Bonds and redevelopment, and we need to work with them on the mechanics of carrying out the relocation and preponderance work, in terms of making them mechanically viable as a component of the bills.

o Schmitt, I would be more than happy to add that in the motion too. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to give direction to staff to take a strong stance on protecting the current STAR Bonds and redevelopment facets, specific to these bills and to bring back [to the council for review] other legislation that may affect other economic development tools. Also to ensure that any additional bonds that we need to issue in the future for either in our redevelopment or STAR Bond districts, are grandfathered in. Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

• AB443 – concerns the election of Council Members in Reno and Sparks.


Page 10 of 21

o Carrigan – this is a charter change that did not go through out Charter Committee and, therefore, he could not support this bill. Not one of his constituents has called to ask him to change the way they elect council members.

o Smith – this is coming in the back door and should be going from the Charter Committee to the Legislature, not the other way around.

o Martini – agree o Schmitt – this is the type of bill that causes division among city councils and he

supports election through the entire city, not just one ward o Ratti – agree that it should have gone through our Charter Committee, but it

didn’t. Supports the bill because they should be running by ward – even though they do support the entire city. Running city-wide is incredibly expensive, versus running just by ward. Although the council has a resolution that does not permit individuals to campaign against the consensus of the Council on any issue, she asked that if the council does take a position, she would like permission to express her individual opinion to the Legislature.

o Carrigan – as a three-term incumbent, he would much rather run ward-wide rather than city-wide; however, he felt this would lead to colloquialism. We have a resolution that states individual campaigning is not allowed and if it we allow it, what good is the resolution.

o Schmitt – what bothers him about this bill is that it has nothing to do with the City of Sparks. It is 63 people at the Legislature exercising power and authority over local government. He felt this was an effort to get one person out of office. He said we need to make a stand that local government should be allowed to make local laws and make any changes that affect our government, because we are closer to the people. This is about home rule and they should not have the right to change our charter without the citizens say so. Either everyone abides by the rules or no one abides by the rules.

o Smith – the Legislature has no business putting forth this bill. It works fine the way it is and there are no citizens saying they don’t like the way we are elected. The Legislature should just stay out of our business and if we want to change this, then it should go through our Charter Committee. He said Ms. Ratti should abide by the resolution.

o Ratti – she distinguishes this from AB98 and the reason is because we are talking about how each one of us as individuals achieve our position on this Council. To say to an individual Council Member that they are not allowed to lobby for the very process by which they are elected is different from taking a position on another type of bill. However, because this bill is so core to how we obtain our position on this very Council, she is asking for an opportunity to speak in support of this legislation. She can respect that this is not the Legislature’s fight, but the reality is that this bill is going to move forward, whether we like it or not, and as it moves forward, she would like the ability to have a say.

o Schmitt – motion to send a very strong message to the Assembly that the Sparks City Council is not in favor of AB443.

o Carrigan – if this does get passed, he would like to see an amendment to say that no one in the legislature can run for a local office in Sparks or Reno for two years.


Page 11 of 21

A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to send a very strong message to the Assembly that the Sparks City Council is not in favor of AB443. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, NO. Motion carried.

• Driscoll – there was a suggestion for an amendment if this goes forward. Did the Council want staff to bring this back if it appears to be getting support or did they want to vote to provide that direction?

• Schmitt – the new buzz word is transparent, so let’s make this transparent – if the Legislature is going to pass a bill that is going to better their chances of winning in local elections – then let’s make it transparent.

A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to amend AB443 so that no one in the legislature can run for a local office in Sparks or Reno for two years. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, NO. Motion carried.

• AB98 – Sparks’ single BDR regarding unobligated room tax. o This will be heard tomorrow o Smith – the Legislative Committee will be testifying in support of this bill

tomorrow • AB 324 – Ethics in Government regarding Campaign Contributions

o Does the Council want to vote on these types of bills separately or provide direction on the general issue

o Martini – does this apply just to local officials or to the legislators also. It depends on the bill and this bill appears to apply to all elected officials

o Martini – we need to know if the bill applies to everyone or just local officials o Carrigan – asked for clarification of what the bill would mean to local officials

We have to report every charity event and conference we attend o Ratti – each one someone else pays for. o Driscoll – it is talking about a $200 amount where fees are waived or you are

attending gratis on behalf of someone else. In both cases they are referring to and event you attend where there is some cost involved where you are not gaining for yourself.

o Council requested this bill be put on a watch list. • AJR2 – Requires a super majority (2/3 yes vote) for any initiative petitions

o Ratti – any initiative that raises revenue – a big difference from just any initiative. o Carrigan – since the Legislators have to have a 2/3 vote to raise taxes, they want

the initiative petition to require a 2/3 vote any time it has to do with revenue. o Ratti – strong believe we should oppose this because we want to do a public

safety initiative o Driscoll – there has never been a tax initiative that has been passed with a 66%

voter approval – they have been in the low 50’s to mid-50’s at best. o Council consensus was to oppose this bill.


Page 12 of 21

A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to oppose AJR2. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

• SB 207 – New language regarding unlawful discrimination regarding sexual orientation in public places of accommodation

o City Attorney Adams – current the Americans with Disabilities Act which gives certain rights to disabled individuals in public places of accommodation. That act has had an impact on municipalities, which now have to meet certain standards with regard to construction of everything from sidewalks and restrooms, to signage. Civil rights acts, in general, were intended to protect specific groups of individuals who have been subjected to discrimination based on their race, color, or gender. This act now wants to provide those same protections to those individuals based upon sexual preferences. This is similar to the California Civil Rights Act. Governmental entities have been sued and spent millions of dollars defending these lawsuits because someone alleges that they have been discriminated against because of their sexual preference. The last defense the City did in Federal Court cost the City $250,000 to win. In his opinion this act will create a whole new class of plaintiffs who, for what ever reason, believe they were discriminated against based on their sexual orientation. This will expose, not only this municipality, but all municipalities in the State of Nevada, to a greater risk of litigation-not a greater risk of liability, but of litigation. However, once these lawsuits are filed, because they are so expensive to defend, the tendency is to settle these types of matters at the expense of the taxpayers.

We are seeing more liberties and rights being bestowed upon specific segments of our society and the taxpayers (Citizens of Sparks) are being required to pay for those rights

If Nevada truly wants to give additional rights that are not recognized by the United States Supreme Court and that are not in the Constitution, then this should be proposed to the citizens of Nevada by way of a constitutional amendment, not creating additional rights by a powerful minority through the laws of Nevada

o Ratti – if we don’t add sexual orientation to Nevada law and someone has a legitimate complaint, do they have any protection under the law?

Adams - Under Federal law and the U.S. Constitution, no. o Ratti – we currently provide protections to all those other classifications, but if a

person with a particular sexual orientation has a complaint regarding discrimination in public accommodation, they have no recourse.

Adams - That is correct. Persons who have been subjected throughout history to ridicule, abuse, torture, and mayhem—those types of groups have been recognized. However this bill proposes to give those same protections to individuals who have a different sexual orientation.

o Ratti – you are against this bill because it extends those protections to this class, or are you against it because it would be expensive for the City.

Adams - I am against it because the City would be forced to defend, yet again, additional frivolous lawsuits.


Page 13 of 21

Adams - I am personally against it because it provides these protections for this particular class, which is not recognized by the United States Supreme Court, by the United States Constitution, and by Nevada’s Constitution.

o Ratti – this is consistent with what the Legislature has done in a lot of other areas. The people of Nevada voted on a employment non-discrimination act that did extend the same protections to people with sexual orientations. I suggest we support this bill, or at the very least, stay neutral. At the very least, even if it cost us money, we need to make sure that people with a different sexual orientation do have protection under the law.

o Martini – I don’t have a problem remaining neutral, but I don’t want to support it at this time. A better avenue would be to have a vote of the citizens through a constitutional amendment.

o Smith – I don’t support this for a couple of reasons. This is just a throw in the water. Pretty soon, if you are thin or heavy--we will wind up protecting everyone and no one.

o Carrigan – for clarification, this is not under federal law. Adams - Under Federal law, Title 7, this is not a protected class of

individuals. o Carrigan – there are three other bills, including our charter bill, that make this

change. Adams - I did not know that.

o Carrigan – page 4, section 4, paragraph 1—a person shall not be appointed or removed from or in any way, favor or discriminated against with respect to any city position or appointed city administrative office because of race, sex, sexual orientation.

Adams – sexual orientation is recognized in employment law. If you are being discriminated against or harassed on the job, there is protection.

o Carrigan – by Federal law that should be in there. Adams – I don’t have a problem with that.

o Carrigan – but you are saying you do have a problem with the other bill because it is not in Federal law.

Adams – the group of individuals referred to in the charter who work for the City should enjoy all rights, irrespective of sexual orientation, and that is fine. Title 7, Ninth Circuit, recognizes being discriminated against in the employment setting for sexual orientation as a just cause of action. The bill is granting rights to individuals who are not employed with the City, but to the general public—anyone who comes into City Hall, anyone who is at a rib cook off or other special event, etc., can expose the City to liability if they believe that they have been discriminated against because of their sexual preference.

o Ratti – the people of Nevada voted for the employment non-discrimination act and I assume the charter bill is bringing our charter into alignment with the employment non-discrimination act. It is not a Federal issue—the voters of our state approved the employment non-discrimination act, which added sexual orientation to employment protection.


Page 14 of 21

A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to remain neutral on SB207. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

• SB210 – requires certain persons to submit proof of how they disposed of unspent campaign contributions

o We do this already o Schmitt – now we just fill out a report – this bill would require proof such as

receipts or copies of cancelled checks. This bill is a result of the few who have abused the system – someone who has been out of office for four years and still has unspent campaign contributions.

o Schmitt – the language needs to be cleaned up (his/her). o Also requires the City clerk to file the reports within 10 days of receipt.

A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to remain neutral on SB210. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

• SB281 – elected official to use website to report contributions of over $100 within 48 hours

o Carrigan – some contributions (checks) are post-dated and you don’t deposit them for a month or two. Do you report them when they are written or when you actually receive the funds.

o Schmitt – way over reaching and it will be very difficult to “live by it” o Smith – we need to oppose this o Martini – agree o Carrigan – need to understand that we are opposing this because it is almost

impossible to report contributions within 48 hours, because of the ambiguity with regard to what your are supposed to do

A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to oppose SB281. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

• SB213 – Sparks City Charter Change – will be heard on 3/27. o Martini – is this the one from the Charter Committee

Yes o Carrigan – we have always stayed neutral on these because we don’t want to

interfere with our Charter Committee o Schmitt – asked for clarification that if we remain neutral on this, it will allow

Council Members to speak on this issue because we haven’t taken a stance as a Council

o Martini – that is what he would assume


Page 15 of 21

A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to remain neutral on SB213. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

• SB224 – revises provisions concerning voting in certain counties by certain members of public bodies

o Carrigan – the way he read this, it means we are back to normal again Clewett – yes, the struck it out

o Carrigan – they could only handle this for four year and then something happened – this is the one that talks about if a body is composed entirely of elected officials, if two of us had to abstain for any kind of reason, then it had to be a 3/0 vote. So they are taking away the provision for changing the quorum due to a conflict.

Chet – correct, Nevada law currently recognizes this. If one member 9out of five) abstains from voting, we are down to four people, and we still need three votes. However, if two people abstain, then we can lower it to 2 out of 3 voting. The problem he has with new ethics laws is that there is a lot of confusion and misunderstanding about these laws mean. This is problematic because if the elected officials don’t understand, they may be more inclined to abstain from voting in order not to violate these vague and confusing laws. If SB224 is made law, it will reduce the ability of the Sparks legislative body to operate effectively.

o Ratti – doesn’t totally understand this. Carrigan – gave an example of how this would affect Sparks’ five person

City Council. He emphasized that if in doubt, check with the City Attorney

Adams – if you ask for an opinion from your attorney and the attorney gives you one; if the Ethics Commission disagrees with what your attorney said, that saves you from getting fined for an intentional ethics violation.

Schmitt – Mr. Adams comment should be taken to heart because there are going to be more and more issues where we don’t want to have the appearance of a conflict of interest. We all need to be very concerned.

Ratti – so if you chose to abstain because you have a conflict, but you don’t have the legal advice to support that, then the quorum can’t be changed.

• Adams – correct. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to oppose SB224. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

• SB264 – Senator Care’s promise to bring something forward that talks about self-determination at the local level

o Martini – we should support someone talking in the legislature about self-determination


Page 16 of 21

o Schmitt – the Nevada League of Cities and the Nevada Association of Counties have been supporting this.

• Bill is being heard on March 25th A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to support SB264. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

• SB267 –changes some requirements for the open meeting law o The City of Sparks is currently following the changes, so it won’t affect the way

we do business A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to stay neutral SB267. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. Ms. Clewett noted that Senator Washington has kept his word. He said he was going to do it and his proposed bill was introduced today – SJR10—repeals the term limits for Assemblymen and Senators at the State level. Council Member Schmitt asked when we can expect to see some of these bills “dying a good death.” Ms. Clewett stated that today was the drop dead date for bills to come out of committee; the next drop dead date, when the bills have to pass from one house to the other, is April 10th. That is when some issues will “die.” Mayor Martini thanked our Legislative Team for all their hard work. Mr. Driscoll stated they try very hard not to burden the Council with a lot of bills; however, this is the big crush to get bills introduced and although it is time consuming, he thanked the Council for their attention. Attorney Adams noted that the Departments spend a great deal of time going through each piece of legislation and providing a reply to our Legislative Team and asked if the Council looks at those responses and whether staff needed to continue to do this, because it does take up a great deal of their time. Mr. Driscoll stated they have been using the share point system to put information on bills together. He explained that there are operational issues which fall to the Manager and policy issues that come to the Council. What they presented today were the policy issues which directly affect Sparks. The share point system was designed so that anyone in the City, through the intranet system, could look at any bill and see what direction we are going. He said it is critical that when the Legislative team is in Carson City at the Legislature, they can look at Share Point and get information, if they are unable to contact a Council Member or Department Head directly. He said he is aware of the burden to staff to review these bills, but it is critical to the work they are doing. This should be the last big push on bills and things should slow down for a while.


Page 17 of 21

6.4 Presentation, discussion and possible action accepting the City of Sparks’ Perspective on Consolidation report (Time: 5:47:50 p.m.)

Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll stated this is an important issue related to AB494 which is passing through the Assembly Government Affairs Committee, asking for a Legislative Study on consolidation of local governments, statewide, with a report coming back to the 2011 Legislative Session. Staff was asked to prepare a report on consolidation with opinions from other entities on the feasibility of consolidation. He said that the general thought is that consolidation saves a lot of money; however, we know from past studies that this is not always the case. Finance Director Tom Minton, Assistant City Manager Randy Mellinger and he put together this document to give an outside perspective, as well as an inside perspective on consolidation. Council Member Ratti noted that the Sparks voters have been consistent in their opposition to consolidation. She asked when the research was done, did they look for reports to support the voter’s position or for any reports on consolidation. Mr. Driscoll stated they looked at approximately 15 to 18 documents through on-line library research. The reports included in this paper were the three highest level reports which basically said the same things that the other studies said. The only study that said consolidation was a good deal was a consultant selling consolidation services. Each study showed the pros and cons of consolidation and the cons outweighed the pros in all the studies. Mr. Driscoll stated that the majority of the studies concluded that if you are beyond a certain size and you are not overlapping services, consolidation does not save money; it actually cost money and you are better off doing shared services rather than consolidation. Council Member Ratti asked Mr. Driscoll to explain the disadvantage listed by our staff as “reduction in promotional opportunities.” Mr. Driscoll stated one of the issues that we had when we did do a consolidation in the area, the primary discussion from the unions (which have the right to negotiate in the consolidation process) is around benefits and potential advancement. Consolidation typically “flattens” organizations and reduces the total number of management personnel, thereby reducing the number of advancement opportunities. Ms. Ratti stated that while she can support the overall study, the concept of not wanting to do consolidation only because it reduces promotional opportunities is not enough of a reason to not consolidate. Council Member Schmitt asked if there were any studies that showed that a bigger government gave the taxpayer a “bigger bang for their buck.” He indicated that he did not feel bigger government provided better services. Mr. Driscoll stated they did not see this in the studies they read and, in fact, there were several organizations that took more than one attempt to get consolidated and there was a tremendous amount of expense to get to that point. Then, when they finally got consolidated, they did not achieve what they thought they would. It was very clear in the studies that if you have the same citizenry receiving the same services from multiple agencies, there are savings. However, we don’t have this in our area. We are having a hard time providing services that we need to provide and we have no overlap and if we do have overlap, it is very minimal. Size is the second issue. The studies all discuss that they contemplated savings, but when they got into the consolidation, that is not what happened.


Page 18 of 21

Mr. Driscoll noted that our citizens have been clear in the last nine years of surveys that they don’t want consolidation. The Council has given direction to staff to continually look for efficiencies and has also been very clear about not giving up governance, including the public safety components and transportation issues. He asked the Council to accept this report so that they can use it at the Legislature to show that consolidation does not mean savings. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to accept the findings and conclusions provided in the City of Sparks’ Perspective on Consolidation report and to accept the report as a policy statement from the city on regional government consolidation. Council Members Ratti, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.5 Discussion and possible action on appointment Council members to a Shared

Services Committee (Time: 6:00:31 p.m.) Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll explained that at a joint meeting the various elected boards voted to set up a shared services committee structure and to appoint elected members to serve. He asked that the Council discuss and select two of its members to serve on this committee. Council Member Schmitt said he voted to form this committee; however, he felt it was an unnecessary expense and it would be best to just allow staff to do their job in determining what services can be shared. With that said, he indicated he would be willing to serve on the committee. Mayor Martini said he felt we should be a part of this committee, whatever happens, and he volunteered to serve on the committee. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to appoint Council Member Schmitt and Mayor Martini to a Shared Services Committee. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.6 Consideration and possible appointment to the Sparks Planning Commission

(Time: 3:41:03 p.m.) (This item was heard out of order) Mayor Martini noted that he was home sick when the candidates for this appointment were interviewed; however, he did watch the interviews and he commented that he had never seen a better qualified group of citizens wishing to serve on the Planning Commission. He said this was a tough decision to make and he is recommending that Doug Voelz be appointed to fill the vacant position on the Sparks Planning Commission.

A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to support the Mayor’s appointment of Douglas Voelz to the Sparks Planning Commission. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. Mayor Martini thanked all the applicants for their interest and time and noted that they will be considered for future vacancies.


Page 19 of 21

6.7 First Reading of Bill No. 2595, amending the Sparks Municipal Code by

delegating to the Chief of Police the power to approve, deny, and revoke alcoholic beverage licenses, providing for an appeal of a decision of the Chief of Police to the City Council; clarifying requirements for such licensing; and providing other matters thereto (Time: 6:04:52 p.m.)

Read by City Clerk Linda Patterson. Mayor Martini announced that the Public Hearing, Second Reading, and possible approval of this bill is scheduled for the Regular City Council Meeting of April 13, 2009.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: None. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items:

8.1 Public Hearing, 2nd Reading and possible action on Bill No. 2602, PCN09003; A request to Rezone approximately 130.0 acres from A-40 (Agriculture) to NUD (New Urban District) from Kiley Ranch, LLC & Lazy Five Company on a site generally located south of the Tierra Del Sol Planned Development and northeast of the intersection of Sparks Boulevard and Pyramid Way (Time: 6:05:33 p.m.)

Associate Planner Chere’ Jigour noted that there were two rezoning findings outlined in the staff report that support this rezoning request. These two findings verify conformance of this rezone proposal to the Sparks Master Plan and the existing surrounding uses. Based on these facts, Planning Staff are recommending approval. Mayor Pro tem Schmitt opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed rezoning. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the rezone associated with PCN09003, based on findings Z1 through Z3 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

8.2 Consideration and possible action for approval of PCN09003; A Final

Handbook for Kiley Ranch North Planned Development Phase Five, for a site approximately 130.0 acres in size, generally located south of the Tierra Del Sol Planned Development and northeast of the intersection of Sparks Boulevard and Pyramid Highway, Sparks, NV (Time: 6:07:48 p.m.)

Community Development Director Neil Krutz noted this was a request for a Final Handbook in the business park and office business park land use portion of the project. Staff and the Planning Commission have found that the final handbook is in substantial compliance with the previous approval of the tentative handbook and therefore this is not a public hearing item. The final handbook does not vary the gross residential density or intensity, nor does it vary the ratio of residential to non residential; it does not reduce the common open space or substantially relocate it; it does not substantially increase the floor area of non residential uses, nor does it substantially


Page 20 of 21

increase the ground cover. There are a few changes in the handbook as outlined in the staff report. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the Kiley Ranch North Phase V Final Handbook as it is in substantial compliance with the Tentative approval, based on facts supporting the finding as set forth in the staff report. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

8.3 Review and possible approval of PCN09003 - A request for a Tentative

Commercial/Industrial Subdivision Map for 15 lots on a site approximately 71.9 acres in size from Kiley Ranch, LLC & Lazy Five Company, generally located in Kiley Ranch North Phase Five Planned Development (Time: 6:09:27 p.m.)

Associate Planner Chere’ Jigour stated this project site is located in the Kiley Ranch North Phase 5 Planned Development. This area allows the development of office park and business park uses. The staff report supports this tentative map proposal as outlined in the tentative map findings and conditions of approval. Planning Commission and Staff are recommending approval. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the Tentative Commercial/Industrial Subdivision Map, based on findings T1 through T12 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report, including the Conditions of Approval 1 through 14. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

General Business Continued:

6.8 Possible motion to adjourn to a Closed Door Session to receive information from the City Attorney’s Office regarding possible litigation (NRS 241.015(2)(b)(2) (Time: 6:11:41 p.m.)

Council Member Schmitt asked that the Council adjourn to a closed door session after they concluded the Council Meeting and the subsequent Redevelopment Agency Meeting. Council Member Carrigan made a motion to adjourn to a closed door session at the conclusion of the Redevelopment Agency Meeting. The motion was seconded by Council Member Smith. City Manager Carey stated that in deference to the late hour and the absence of one of the Council Members, and the fact that the Council did not intend to take action on this item tonight, he is requesting that the Council allow him to arrange for this item to be scheduled for a later date. Council Member Carrigan expressed concern that this was regarding potential litigation and he would rather hear about it now rather than later. Attorney Adams stated that any litigation that the Council may be briefed on can wait for another week or two.


Page 21 of 21

Council Member Carrigan withdrew his motion and Council Member Smith withdrew his second.

6.9 Review, consideration of alternatives, and possible direction to the City

Attorney and City Manager regarding overpayment of tourism and marketing funds for fiscal years 2006, 2007, and 2008 by the Reno-Sparks Convention and Visitors Authority

This item was not discussed. 9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 6:14:01 p.m.) Council Member Ratti welcomed her mother-in-law visiting from Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Council Member Smith requested that the Zoning Code be reviewed to add electric fences to the industrial areas of Sparks. Council Member Carrigan offered thanks to Evan Wright of Commercial Pressure Washing for volunteering to assist with graffiti removal on private property. Council Member Smith thanked Chief Asher for the police contingent that is travelling on Friday to Oakland to represent Sparks at the funerals of the Oakland police officers. City Manager Carey announced a vacancy on the Sparks Parks & Recreation Commission and asked for applications to be submitted within the next 30 days. Council Member Schmitt asked that recognition be done for all of the volunteers who are coming forward to help with the shortages due to budget constraints. 10. *Adjournment (Time: 6:17:07 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:17 p.m. ______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________

City Clerk

>>>

Page 1 of 21

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 2:00 P.M. Monday, April 13, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 2:01:01 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 2:02 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 2:01:07 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno (joined meeting at 2:10 p.m.), Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 2:01:22 p.m.) The invocation was given by Rajan Zed from the Universal Society of Hinduism. Mr. Zed requested that his prayer be entered into the minutes. His prayer has been submitted in written form and is hereby made a part of the record by being included in the meeting backup. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 2:04:23 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Julia Ratti. Mayor Martini announced that Item 8.4 had been withdrawn from the agenda; however, anyone present wishing to speak regarding this item could do so under public comment. *Comments from the Public (Time: 2:06:03 p.m.) Shirley Bertschinger expressed her opinion of the Lazy 8 Casino proposal, stating that this project is not compatible with the surrounding land uses. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 2:05:22 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. Item 8.4 was withdrawn from the agenda. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: (Time: 2:09:24 p.m.) 3.1 Regular Meeting of March 23, 2009 A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 23, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

Regular City Council Meeting Minutes for April 13, 2009

Page 2 of 21

4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest: 4.1 Commendation to Travis Wong (Time: 2:09:47 p.m.)

Mayor Martini read a commendation for Travis Wong, the owner of Discount Pet Food & Supplies, in recognition of his generous donation of food to the Police Department’s K-9 unit. Mr. Wong accepted the commendation and thanked the Council for the recognition.

4.2 Commendation to Evan Wright, Commercial Pressure Washing (Time: 2:11:49 p.m.)

Mayor Martini read a commendation for Evan Wright, the owner of Commercial Pressure Washing, in recognition of his generous assistance in using his services to help with graffiti removal in the City of Sparks. Mr. Wright accepted the commendation and thanked the Council for the recognition.

4.3 Proclamation – Public Safety Telecommunications Week (Time: 2:13:30

p.m.) Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming April 12-18, 2009, as Public Safety Telecommunications Week in recognition of the service and expertise of our Emergency Communications Dispatchers. The proclamation was accepted by Dispatchers Shelly Rickets, Joanna Bellamy and Mary Crandall on behalf of all the dispatchers.

4.4 Proclamation – National DNA Day (Time: 2:16: p.m.)

Council Member Ron Smith read a proclamation naming April 25, 2009, as the seventh annual National DNA Day in recognition of the Genetic Alliance and the role genetics plays in all human health. The proclamation was accepted by Robin Palmer, a certified genetic counselor with Northern Nevada Genetic Counseling (www.genesrus.net).

4.5 Update on progress of the Tahoe-Pyramid Bikeway and expected 2009-10

sections in Sparks’ sphere of influence (Time: 2:18:38 p.m.) Ms. Janet R. Phillips, Founder and President of the Tahoe-Pyramid Bikeway Project, provided the Council with an update of the overall project and the works in progress for 2009 in the Sparks area. Ms. Phillips emphasized that they can’t build the bikeway without government partners and they need their partners to say, “If you build it, we will own it.” Mayor Martini asked what the big “push back” was with Storey County. Ms. Phillips said that a group of property owners for property due east of the water treatment plant (Story County Partners) did not want the trail to go through their property unless they could get, as a quid pro quo, a full road easement around the sewer plant, because the have no access to their land. There have been meetings with City staff, the property owners, and the sewer plant to see if this is possible. Another concern is who will own the easement, if it is granted.

5. Consent Items: Time: 2:27:28 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.14. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Page 3 of 21

5.1 Report of Claims and Bills approved for payment and the appropriation transfers are for the period March 5, 2009, through March 25, 2009



Alcoholic Beverage license for GMRI, Inc. dba The Olive Garden Italian Restaurant #1785, located at 1481 E. Lincoln Way, Sparks, NV, submitted by Ms. Elizabeth Charlene Abney

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for an On Premises Alcoholic Beverage License for The Olive Garden. Ms. Abney currently holds licenses for the Olive Garden and Red Lobster restaurants in Reno. The license will provide a $1, 000.00 annual fee plus $1.00 per $1,000.00 over $50,000.00 annually and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.


for Winner’s Gaming, Inc. dba Vista Mart & Gas, located at 2995 Vista Boulevard, Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Robert Gene King

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for a Gaming License for Winner’s Gaming, Inc., doing business at Vista Mart & Gas. Winner’s Gaming is a licensed Slot Route Vendor with several current gaming licenses of Terrible’s locations in the area. The license will provide an $840.00 annual fee for 7 multi-denominational, upright slot machines; contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.


for Kiss It, LLC, dba Mama Rumba Salsa Cantina, located at 1955 Oddie Boulevard, Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. James Joseph Gurnea Jr.

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for a Cabaret License for Vixens. The license will provide a $1,300.00 annual fee, plus $1.00 per $1,000.00 over $50,000.00 annually and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of the Judge Pro Tempore list for

Municipal Court for calendar year 2009 An agenda item from Court Administrator Heidi Shaw recommending the City Council approve the following attorneys as Pro tempore Judges for the Municipal Court as follows: Dean Heidrich, Esq.; Michael Specchio, Esq.; Lewis S. Taitel, Esq.; Cheryl Field-Lang, Esq. These attorneys are utilized in the event that a Judge is unavailable to hear matters due to illness, vacation, mandatory judicial training, attendance at judicial conferences, and/or recusal from a case.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval of a Final Subdivision Map for Miramonte, Phase 4A

An agenda item from City Surveyor Andy Fuller recommending the City Council approve a Final Subdivision Map as submitted. This subdivision is a continuation of the Miramonte


Page 4 of 21

Planned Development and is generally located northeasterly of Los Altos Boulevard. This subdivision will create 121 lots on 133.7 acres. The current zoning is New Urban District and the developer will be Corona Miramonte, LLC. The map has been checked and the appropriate fees have been paid. A performance bond has been filed with the City Clerk to guarantee the construction of the public improvements.

5.7 Consideration and possible acceptance of the Interlocal Agreement with City of Reno: Repeat Offender Program

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an Interlocal Agreement for the Repeat Offender Program (ROP). This program is aimed at identifying the small proportion of “career criminals” who are responsible to committing a disproportionately large number of crimes. Reno Police Department will administer the program and one detective from Sparks will be assigned to the unit full-time. In the past Sparks has participated in the program, but not full-time. Because the Washoe County Sheriff’s Office is no longer participating in the program, a new interlocal agreement was created so that the agreement could continue, even if one party removes itself from participation. There is no financial impact under the new agreement.

5.8 Consideration and possible acceptance of the Interlocal Agreement

Establishing a Regional Sex Offender Notification Unit An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an Interlocal Agreement for coordination and cooperation in law enforcement in the tracking, monitoring, investigation, public notification and prosecution of sex offenders. This agreement establishes a Regional Sex Offender Notification Unit as a means of maximizing coordination and cooperation and allows the unit to continue in full force and effect, even if one party removes itself from participation

5.9 Consideration and possible acceptance of the Interlocal Agreement Establishing a Multi-jurisdictional Gang Unit

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an Interlocal Agreement reestablishing a gang unit composed of law enforcement personnel from various agencies, after the withdrawal of the Washoe County Sheriff’s Office from participation in the original agreement. The new interlocal agreement was created so that the unit could continue, even if one party removes itself from participation in the future. Reno Police Department will administer the program and two detectives from Sparks will be assigned to the unit. The gang unit is funded primarily by grant money, and Sparks has a relatively small additional obligation which will be paid from drug forfeiture proceeds. No money will be paid from the City’s general fund.

5.10 Consideration and possible acceptance of the Regional Street Enforcement

Team Interlocal Agreement An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an interlocal agreement for reestablishing a regional street enforcement team (SET) to deal with street crime in downtown Reno and in problem neighborhoods throughout the area, due to the withdrawal of the Washoe County Sheriff’s Office from the program. The new interlocal


Page 5 of 21

agreement was created so that the unit could continue, even if one party removes itself from participation in the future. Reno Police Department will administer the program with an Advisory Board of local law enforcement agency heads.

5.11 Consideration and possible approval of a Letter of Consent with regard to Somach Simmons & Dunn’s representation of the Western Regional Water Commission, as well as the Cities of Reno and Sparks, with regard to the total maximum daily load for nitrate and phosphate on the Truckee River

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas recommending the City Council grant approval for Somach, Simmons & Dunn to represent the Western Regional Water Commission (WRWC) with regard to the effort to revise the discharge standards for the Truckee River. The law firm has indicated that although the firm has been retained by the Cities of Reno and Sparks to represent them on a range of water quality matters, they do not have a conflict of interest with regard to representing the WRWC. However, the law requires that the proposed representation of the WRWC be disclosed to the firm’s clients and that the firm obtain written consent from those clients to represent WRWC. In the even of a conflict, the firm will withdraw from representing WRWC and will continue to advise and represent the Cities. Council is asked to approve this arrangement by signing a letter of consent.

5.12 Consideration and possible approval of the City of Sparks’ Five-Year

Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Fiscal years beginning July 1, 2009 An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel recommending the City Council approve adopt the CIP as prepared by City Staff. Staff has been working to identify and utilize appropriate funds available to maximize capital improvements within the City. The plan includes an executive summary; a listing of the proposed project categorized by funding source; the vehicle replacement and deferred replacement plans; and a brief description of each project. All projects listed are subject to the City Manager’s recommendations and City Council approval of the final budget.

5.13 Consideration and possible approval of a Professional Services Contract with

HDR Engineering, Inc., for prevailing Wage Report Review in Support of Construction of the Legends at Sparks Marina Project

An agenda item from Community Development Director Neil Krutz recommending the City Council approve a contract for buildings B, C, D, E, F, and R in the Legends at Sparks Marina project. These buildings are currently under construction and that construction will be paid for using a variety of public funds (STAR and LID bond proceeds). These types of public financing require that prevailing wages be paid and obligates the City to review the wage reports to ensure that prevailing wages are paid for construction of the project. Staff is moving the wage report services from a previous consultant to HDR Engineering for this portion of the project. The anticipated cost for these services is $73,080.00, which is reimbursable from STAR bond proceeds.

5.14 Consideration and possible award of contract for Golden Eagle Regional

Park Concessions RFP #08/09-22 to SES Nevada LLC An agenda item from Parks and Recreation Director Stan Sherer recommending the City Council


Page 6 of 21

approve a contract with SES Nevada, LLC, for concessions at the Golden Eagle Regional Park. Bully’s operated the concessions for the 2008 season; however, the plan they submitted for future concessions included extensive remodeling. An RFP was distributed to determine interest from other contractors. Bully’s bid was less than half of the bid from SES and SES is willing to invest in the tenant improvements to the upstairs of the building. It is anticipated that the City will receive annual revenue of $100,000.00 for the contract. 6. General Business:

6.1 Consideration and possible acceptance of the 2009 Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Formula grant funding to the Sparks Police Department from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs in the amount of $221,607 (Time: 2:28:23 p.m.)

Police Chief Steve Asher stated that the Police Department has an opportunity to apply for this grant through the Reno Police Department. He said they have to obtain approval from the Sparks Council in order to submit an application for the grant. The department will use the funds to purchase about 20 tactical kits for patrol officers to equip them to respond effectively to an active shooter situation. $30,000 will be used to purchase a report writing program to enable officers to submit their reports from their patrol vehicles. Funds will also be used to enhance the department’s web site and a “crime view software” program. Council Member Carrigan asked if there were any matching fund requirements for this grant. Chief Asher replied, “Absolutely not.” The department typically applies for this grant every year, but usually in much smaller amounts. This large amount is a one-time opportunity as part of the stimulus package. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to accept the allotted grant award in the amount of $221,607. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.2 Consideration and possible acceptance of a grant from the Truckee River

Fund in the amount of $500,000 for reconstruction of the Pioneer Diversion irrigation structure on the Truckee River near the Greg Street Bridge (Time: 2:32:46 p.m.)

Flood Control Manager Shaun Gooch noted that this is the second grant we would be receiving from this fund. We previously received $250,000 design and permitting in July of last year. The Pioneer Diversion structure is one of the older diversion structures in this area and every year they (farmers and University personnel) have had to shore up the structure or do other emergency work during the spring runoff events. With this grant, the city will be able to start reconstruction of the structure in July of this year with completion sometime in October. When the project is completed, we will have a much better system in terms of fish passage and environmental issues with regard to water quality. Mayor Martini asked if this work will improve flood control. Mr. Gooch stated it will bring flood conditions back to where they are supposed to be, but does not improve the overall flood


Page 7 of 21

control model. There may be some local improvement due to moving the structure upstream about 700 feet. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to accept the grant from the Truckee River Fund in the amount of $500,000 for reconstruction of the Pioneer Diversion Irrigation structure on the Truckee River near the Greg Street Bridge as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.3 Consideration and possible action on Appeal by Mr. Robert Covington of

Sparks Building Department’s Decision of Violation (Time: 2:36:49 p.m.) Mr. Robert Covington referred to a statement that he asked the City Clerk to provide to the Council, stating that the only way he can be forced to have an easement on his property is: 1) if it is open and detritus and 2) easement by necessity. Mr. Covington maintained there was no necessity for the sewer easement to go through his property because the property owner can connect to the sewer system directly. Mr. Covington noted that the person who is purchasing the property has already agreed to connect to the sewer system directly. Council Member Carrigan asked Mr. Covington for background information on this appeal. Mr. Covington stated that he is the owner of a two-story office building at the corner of Pyramid and “E” Street and there is an old shack next door to his building. The other building has been vacant, off and on, for 15 years and when ever the building next door is occupied, his sewer line backs up and floods his bottom floor. He finally had the sewer line dug up to find out what the problem was and discovered a sewer line coming across his property and connecting to his sewer line before the sidewalk. At that time he talked with the owner of the property. They discovered that there is no slope to the line going to the other property so the sewage builds up in the line and then when someone in his building flushes, it causes his lines to back up. The person who owned the other building was going through some financial problems and would not work with him. After talking with several plumbers, they could not guarantee the system would not back up in the future. Mr. Covington said he did not want the easement on his property, so he went to Countrywide (the owner of the property) and served them notice that he had terminated the sewer line and that they would need to disclose this in the sale of the property and discount the price accordingly. The property was originally listed at $200,000 and it has now dropped to $55,000. Mr. Covington said he felt this issue had been handled among the property owners. The owner of the property behind his business is in the process of purchasing the subject parcel and plans to run the sewer line back through that property, rather than directly to the street. Mr. Covington stated he tried to resolve this problem by offering to purchase the property for $70,000, but due to personal issues between them, the other property owner would not sell to Mr. Covington. Mr. Covington stated the violation he was issued for altering a sewer line on a commercial property was incorrect—he did not alter a sewer line on a commercial property; he terminated a sewer line on a residential property which was encroaching on his commercial property. Mr. Covington said he has researched this issue; he has gotten legal advice and he knows exactly


Page 8 of 21

what he is doing and where he stands. He said he can’t believe that the City Attorney has let this issue go this far and that it did not make sense that the City would get involved in suit that they would loose; especially when the issue has been handled in the public arena. Council Member Schmitt stated he was under the impression that the sewer line is on public right of way. Mr. Covington stated the line runs across his property and there is no easement for the sewer line. He said he asked the City to prove to him that the sewer line was legally installed and/or that there is an easement; but the City couldn’t do this. Council Member Schmitt asked if the other property owner has obtained a permit to hook into the other sewer line. Mr. Covington stated the escrow has not closed because the other property is in foreclosure and the transaction longer than normal. Council Member Smith asked how long the sewer line has been in the ground and how long Mr. Covington has owned the property. Mr. Covington stated that the sewer line was probably 100 years old and he had owned the property for 25 years. Council Member Smith asked Mr. Covington whether he considered shutting off the other sewer line as altering the sewer line. Mr. Covington stated he did not alter his sewer line, he shut off the other line, which is a residential line. He stated he was served a notice for a code violation for a commercial property. Council Member Carrigan asked what the City did that Mr. Covington did not like. Mr. Covington said the City served him with a code violation notice, telling him he needed to get a permit before he could terminate the other sewer line. He said the City said they would not give him a permit because it was a legally established line. Mr. Covington said that the City does not have an easement or proof that the sewer line was legally established; therefore he will not allow the line to run across his property any longer—that is why the City came up with the code violation. Council Member Ratti asked if Mr. Covington had requested a permit and was denied. Mr. Covington said he did not file for a permit. He talked to the City Attorney’s Office and to one of the inspectors who served the notice of violation and he was told that of course the City would not issue a permit to terminate the line. He said he had already terminated the line before he spoke to the City employees—someone had notified the City that the line had been terminated and that is when the City became involved. Ms. Ratti asked what action the City was asking Mr. Covington to take. Mr. Covington stated that what he expects to happen is that the City will start fining him per day until the line is reconnected—in which case, he will file an injunction and go forward from there. Assistant City Attorney Doug Thornley stated the issue is not whether the sewer line is legally established—the Council does not have the authority to make that determination and neither does Mr. Covington. A judge of competent jurisdiction would be the only person to make that determination. This issue today is whether or not Mr. Covington violated the building code by not pulling a permit before he altered a sewer line. He has admitted that this is the case. Whether or not the line was legally established, has no bearing on the analysis today. If Mr. Covington wanted to alter his own sewer line, he still would not be able to do it without asking for a permit. It does not matter whose line it is, or whether the line was legally established—the


Page 9 of 21

issue is whether or not he got a permit—which, of course, he would not get because we do believe it is a legally established (the City Surveyor will discuss this later). Mr. Thornley stated that under Title 7 of the Sparks Municipal Code, building code violations of this nature also become a nuisance. Mr. Covington has also been cited for a nuisance. A nuisance can be pursued in three ways—as a criminal complaint (a misdemeanor); as an abatement proceeding (which is what we are asking Mr. Covington to do—reconnect the line until such time as he can work out the property dispute with his neighbor); or both ways, simultaneously. As a misdemeanor criminal complaint, it is a separate offense for each day that this condition persists. Mr. Covington was originally cited on November 25, 2008, and to date he has not reconnected the line. That is approximately 139 separate misdemeanor complaints. Under the same provision of the Sparks Municipal Code, the City Council, if it chooses to uphold the violation today, can give Mr. Covington 10 days (or longer if they wish) to abate the nuisance. If Mr. Covington does not abate the nuisance, the City can then file, in a court of competent jurisdiction, for an injunction or an order authorizing the abatement process. If the City is forced to undertake the abatement process, Mr. Covington will be liable for the contract costs of doing the work, plus a 15% administrative fee. Council Member Schmitt noted that he is familiar with this problem because there was a similar situation in his ward; however, that situation was resolved without going to court. His concern was with regard to the health hazard this situation is causing. He felt we should not be holding this property owner responsible for someone else’s problem. Mr. Thornley stated he empathized with Mr. Covington’s situation; however, Mr. Covington did not follow the proper procedures—he should have asked a judge to declare it was an illegal line and then he could have taken action. Regardless of the situation, we can’t have people cutting off access to the sewer. Mr. Thornley noted that the City has offered to waive the new hook up fees if the property owner chooses to hook up the sewer line at a different point. Council Member Smith commented that he felt Mr. Covington should re-connect the sewer line and go through the proper channels to get the other property owner to change the sewer hook-up. Council Member Carrigan asked Mr. Covington why he did not get a court order before he disconnected the other sewer line. Mr. Covington said because he is within in rights—he researched it and there is no way he can be forced to reattach the sewer line. Mr. Covington said if this is not resolved his way today, he will be taking the issue to Court and if he loses in court then he will take it to the newspapers. City Attorney Adams noted that it is not the City’s job to advocate the legal rights of Mr. Covington. If Mr. Covington has health issues because of his neighbor, his legal remedies are to go to the health district and the district court. If Mr. Covington has questions regarding dedicated sewer lines--that is up to the court. The legal question today is whether the City wants to enforce its laws in a uniform manner or to simply allow individuals, for whatever reason, to cut off or cap sewer lines that are not theirs. This is the issue being presented to the City Council today—we are here to ensure that the laws are administered and enforced.


Page 10 of 21

Mr. Covington stated that he has worked this out with Countrywide and the potential purchaser and it did not make sense for the City to keep pursuing this just because one person, who doesn’t like him, is pushing the City to do this. He said the only person who would loose is himself and he is the only one who has the teeth to pursue this. The City should just back off because this is being taken care of in the public sector. Council Member Salerno said our job is not to decide who is right and who is wrong—if it is a health hazard, then the health department needs to be contacted. Mr. Covington disconnected it (the sewer line)—reconnect it—and then go through the proper procedures. Community Development Director Neil Krutz responded to questions from Council, noting that while current codes requires each residence to have its own sewer lateral, a hundred years ago it was a common practice to have multiple hookups on the same sewer lateral. He said that throughout the older parts of town, this was a fairly common practice. In as much as each one of these types of situations is unique and has its own set of circumstances, the City does not have a set policy; beyond the obvious one of following the code. In response to questions and concerns from Council, City Surveyor Andy Fuller reviewed the history of the property, stating this property was originally recorded as four lots. By 1907, all four lots had a common ownership and three structures were built on the property, crossing over lot lines. At that time, it is believed, all three structures were connected to a common sewer line, which is located in front of the property that Mr. Covington now owns. The structures (homes) were rented out by the original owner until his death in 1930, at which time the homes were sold by the courts to the persons who were renting the homes. The deeds that were created by court order grant the structures into lots and include all appurtenances thereto (including all utility connections). The deeds, therefore, grant (by prescriptive right) a common connection for all three structures. Mr. Fuller said there is a sewer main that runs through the alley between E and F Streets and the northerly structure has since connected into that sewer main. However, Mr. Covington’s property and the middle parcel (509) still had a common connection—which Mr. Covington terminated. Mr. Fuller emphasized that what was unknown to the purchasers when they acquired the property in 1935 was that the deeds, by bonified right, gave a prescriptive easement for the sewer line to exist. Council Member Ratti stated she is acquainted with the problems relating to older homes in Sparks and she felt it was not the City’s role to get involved in disputes between property owners. She commended Mr. Covington for trying to work this out with his neighbor, but the issue is that the reason we ask people to pull a permit if they are going to do construction is so that we can evaluate what was done in the past. She said that because the property is in escrow and a potential solution has been worked out, the City could be flexible in allowing a little more time for the situation be resolved. However, beyond a short time extension, the City should enforce the code. Council Member Carrigan asked Attorney Thornley if the Council had the ability to give Mr. Covington an extension of time. Mr. Thornley stated that the Council had the ability to ask Mr.


Page 11 of 21

Covington to abate the violation in 10 days or any reasonable period the Council chose to set. A discussion was held regarding what the length of time would be appropriate. Attorney Thornley stated that because the judicial system moves slowly, he is requesting that if Council chose to give Mr. Covington a time extension, they incorporate into their motion a caveat that if Mr. Covington has started the court order process, but it has not yet reached its conclusion (by the end of the extension), that Mr. Covington be allowed to ask for an additional time extension, if needed. Council Member Ratti emphasized that it was important that this (sewer line) issue be resolved whether or not the pending foreclosure sale goes through. She also wanted it understood that Mr. Covington did not have 180 days to start the process, but 180 days to start and conclude the process of resolving this issue through the court. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to allow Mr. Covington a 180 day extension to give him time to correct the issue through the courts and if completed, the violation will be abated. If the process of correction is not completed in 180 days, Mr. Covington is required to come back before the Council to explain his failure to comply. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.



Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll and Administrative Analyst Kathy Clewett reviewed current legislative issues as follows:

• Friday was the deadline for all bills to be out of committee. They now have two weeks to get off the floor.

• AB443 – an amendment just came out. This is the ward election bill to establish separate ward elections. The amendment requests that the City of Sparks and City of Reno put a question on the ballot to ask voters about this situation.

o Driscoll – this bill establishes a ward component by election. It asks Sparks to ask the voters if they want ward elections for both the primary and the general.

o Carrigan – expressed concern that this directive was circumventing our Charter Committee

o Schmitt – expressed concern that this would mean a person could be elected by a small majority in a ward rather than by a majority of all registered voters

o Smith – concern that in some of the wards a person could get elected with only 100 votes and felt that it should go through the Charter Committee – against it.

o Salerno – didn’t we already vote to oppose this because it did not go through out Charter Committee?

Yes, but the wording was amended, so we need to vote on the amended wording


Page 12 of 21

o A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to oppose AB443. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, NO. Motion carried.

• AB458—establishes an education “rain day” fund utilizing or assessments from redevelopment.

o Sparks has been neutral because the discussion and/or amendments are still fluid. o Being driven by the South because there are also issues with housing subsidies o Recommend “softly” opposing this (because it is taking money from the

Redevelopment Agency) until such time as there is a final position between he local entities and the Speaker

o Geno—we need to see where this bill goes. We would like to see no money carved out [of redevelopment], but we may have to settle for something—softly oppose

o A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to mildly oppose AB458 as the amendments that currently exist will negatively affect our current redevelopment districts. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

• SB301—deals with military installations and planning coordination between the military and the local entities. In the amendment process the City of Reno put in permissive language allowing the consolidation of planning efforts in the local jurisdictions in Washoe County; however, this amendment did not go through. Our fear is that because this has to go through another “house” the amendment might come up again. If language comes up again for potential consolidation of our planning functions across the board, what does the Council want to do.

o Shaun—this amendment is very short and it is enabling. However, the subject (planning, zoning, and building) is very complex and we want to make sure it would not damage the development plans, handbooks, etc. This change should be very deliberate and detailed to make sure it doesn’t create economic impacts.

o Smith—Our MOU with Reno was not followed when they presented this to the Legislature without contacting Sparks.

The MOU does not require us to agree, but it does say we will be advised before it happens and we heard about it when it was walked into the committee.

o Schmitt—this amendment set a wrong tone to the entire community—that one government agency is submitting legislation so that they can take over various essential services in our community.

o A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to give staff general direction that if an amendment similar to this emerges in any other form or shape and there is no time to bring it back to Council, then staff should oppose it. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

• SB294 (Senator Lee) and SB399 (Senator Raggio)—both these bills propose studies to look at the total tax system; the allocation methodologies for consolidated taxes and property taxes


Page 13 of 21

o We have been working with Senator Lee to craft the bill as a study—it would not be an interim study as much as it would be a staff study. We have volunteered to participate on these bills with the big five cities and two large counties.

o Senator Raggio is looking at how the Interim Finance Committee would look at the same topic

o We have suggested that we would support those studies o Staff is asking for direction to continue working on and be involved in those

studies. Schmitt—we have been asking for this for quite a while Salerno—did Sparks’ bill draft get out of committee?

• No, it did not. We had the option of bring it up for a vote or letting it die. There were not enough votes on the committee and politically it is better to let it quietly die rather than be withdrawn.

o A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to direct staff to continue working in the process; to actively participate in the studies; and report back on the results. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.5 Consideration of a Cooperative Fire Protection Agreement between the

Sparks Fire Department and the United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Carson City District Office (Time: 3:50:38 p.m.)

Fire Chief Andy Flock explained that agreement allows for local assistance from and to the BLM free for 12 hours. It also provides “assistance for hire” for all federal fires outside of the 1 mile boundary of the City of Sparks. This agreement is the same as the agreement we have had with the BLM for the past five years and there are no significant changes from the previous agreement, it simply extends the mutual cooperation for another five years. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to a approve the Cooperative Fire Protection Agreement between the Sparks Fire Department and the United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Carson City District Office. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.6 Consideration and possible approval of allocating: $15,000 to Nevada

Hispanic Services for Cinco de Mayo; $7,500 to Parks and Recreation for Arts in Bloom; $7,500 to Roadshows, Inc. for Street Vibrations 2009 Spring Rally; and $15,000 to Parks and Recreation for Farmer’s Market (Time: 3:52:55 p.m.)

City Manager Shaun Carey noted that this is our annual allocation of room tax revenues from the Reno Sparks Convention & Visitors Authority (RSCVA) which can only be used for the marketing and promotion of tourism in the City of Sparks and the operation and maintenance of capital improvements within redevelopment areas of the city. In light of the recent discovery of the overpayment of room tax monies by the RSCVA, the Tourism and Marketing Committee (TourMark) was not comfortable approving allocations in the amount provided in 2008. However, they did want to provide some funding to the event sponsors and therefore voted to


Page 14 of 21

allocate 50% of the amounts awarded in 2008 to the sponsors of the first four events of the season. The committee indicated they would discuss allocations further once a repayment plan has been established with the RSCVA. Council Member Schmitt noted that the Council is approving expenditures of room tax funds per the opinion of the City Attorney. Council Member Carrigan asked if there were plans to fund the other 50% for these events. It was noted that the TourMark Committee met this morning and voted to fund additional events at only 50% of what they received last year. We have to allocate funds based on availability, so if there are funds left over after the City reaches a resolution with the RSCVA on their overpayment of funds, there is a slight possibility that each event could receive additional funding. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve the funding allocations as listed for the first four events of the 2009 special events season. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.7 Consideration and possible approval of the Water Rights Purchase and Sale

Agreement as presented by staff for 8.25 acre-feet of water rights in the amount of $111,375 plus one half of the closing costs, which is approximated at $1,000 (Time: 3:57:17 p.m.)

Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas noted that staff is seeking direction from Council regarding the purchase of 8.25 acre feet of water rights at $13,500 per acre foot from North Valley Holdings, LLC. The intent is to obtain water rights for the City’s use in several potential areas to enhance water quality. Based on the current water rights market, the price of $13,500 per acre foot is competitive and reasonable at this time. Council Member Carrigan asked if these water rights were already permitted through the State Engineer’s Office. Ms. Thomas responded that yes, they are. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the Water Right Purchase and Sale Agreement as presented by staff for 8.25 acre feet of water rights in the amount of $111,375 plus approximately $1,000 in closing costs. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Agreement as presented by staff for 26.53 acre-feet of water rights n the amount of $358,155 plus one half the closing costs, which is approximately at $1,000 (Time: 3:59:45 p.m.)

Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas noted that staff is seeking direction from Council regarding the purchase of 26.53 acre feet of water rights at $13,500 per acre foot from Brighton Meadows I, LLC (21.61) and Truckee Meadows Water Research of Nevada (4.92). The intent is to obtain water rights for the City’s use in several potential areas to enhance water quality. Based on the


Page 15 of 21

current water rights market, the price of $13,500 per acre foot is competitive and reasonable at this time. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the Water Right Purchase and Sale Agreement as presented by staff for 26.53 acre feet of water rights in the amount of $358,155 plus approximately $1,000 in closing costs. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.9 Consideration, Discussion and Possible Approval to Allocate Fiscal Year

2009-2010 Community Development Block Grant and General funds for public services activities through the Washoe County Human Services Consortium, Sparks Parks and Recreation Programs and homelessness prevention services at the Community Assistance Center Resource Center (Time: 4:00:36 p.m.)

Grant Administrator Tracy Wheeler explained that Washoe County Human Services Consortium (WCCHC) funding allocation cycle for FY 2009-2010 is underway and a total of 23 applications were received. Each jurisdiction participating in the consortium must determine the amount of grant funding to be allocated through the consortium process. Historically, the City has allocated the maximum percentage of its Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds allowed by regulation. The City has not received a funding notice for FY 2009-2010; however, to prevent any potential delays, staff is requesting that 15% of the CDBG funds the City will receive be allocated for contribution to the consortium and to allocate $50,000 in general funds to the consortium for human services. Staff is also recommending that the Council designate and determine the set-aside of general funds for Sparks Parks and Recreation and the Community Assistance Center and how it shall be used. Council Member Smith asked if we contributed $25,000 from the General Fund every year. Ms. Wheeler stated that historically we have contributed $50,000; however, due to the fact that we have had budget cuts and Parks and Recreation has had to seek grants to cover some of the programs, it has been recommended that we retain $25,000 for our Parks and Recreation programs. There is also a recommendation to contribute $25,000 to the Community Assistance Center (homeless shelter). A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to authorize the allocation of 15% of Program Year 2009 CDBG funding to public service activities through the Washoe County Human Services Consortium process and $50,000 of FY 2009-2010 Sparks’ general funds (SUBSDY) to be expended as $25,000 for Sparks Parks and Recreation programs and $25,000 to the Resource Center for Homelessness Prevention. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.10 First Reading and possible discussion of Bill No.2604, Annexation request, in

accordance with the City of Sparks 7-year annexation program, from Stonefield, Inc., for a site approximately 375 acres in size. Upon annexation the zoning would convert from a Washoe County Designation of TC (Tourist Commercial) to a City of Sparks zoning designation of TC (Tourist


Page 16 of 21

Commercial) within the City of Sparks’ Sphere of Influence generally located in the East Truckee River Canyon north of Interstate 80 and Waltham Way approximately 6 miles east of the Sparks city limits. (Time: 4:04:36 p.m.)

City Clerk Linda Patterson read Bill No. 2604 by title. Mayor Martini announced that the public hearing and second reading of this bill was scheduled for the regular Council Meeting of April 27, 2009.

6.11 Review, consideration of alternatives, and possible direction to the City

Attorney and City Manager regarding overpayment of tourism and marketing funds for fiscal years 2006, 2007, and 2008 by the Reno-Sparks Convention and Visitors Authority (Time: 4:05:27 p.m.)

City Manager Shaun Carey explained how the overpayment occurred and outlined the proposed agreement for repayment of the funds to the RSCVA. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to direct the City Manager to proceed with the repayment plan as outlined and agreed to by the RSCVA. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: 7.1 Public Hearing, Second Reading, Consideration, and possible approval of

Bill No. 2595, amending the Sparks Municipal Code by delegating to the Chief of Police the power to approve, deny and revoke Alcoholic Beverage Licenses; providing for an appeal of a decision of the Chief of Police to the City Council; clarifying requirements for such licensing; and providing other matters thereto (Time: 4:07:29 p.m.)

Sr. Assistant City Attorneys Tom Riley and Wendy Chavez stated this ordinance makes changes enabling the Chief of Police to issue, deny, or revoke an alcoholic beverage license and grants the City Council the ability to hear appeals of these decisions. Additionally, the language in the requirements for licensing has been changed to give clear guidelines in the granting, denying, and revocation of such licenses. Mr. Riley noted that this ordinance will expedite the process and eliminate the need for the City Council to approve applications for liquor licenses. However; the Council will still act as the appeals board in the event that an applicant is denied. Council Member Carrigan expressed concern regarding churches and charter schools which may be located in strip malls which also contain businesses that serve or sell liquor. Mr. Riley stated he was not aware there was a problem in this regard. Mr. Carrigan noted that previously the ordinance indicated “a reasonable distance” and now it specifies “500 feet.” Various possible scenarios and possible impacts were discussed. Mr. Riley said staff did not feel this would be a problem, but if it becomes problem, then the ordinance can be amended. After further discussion, it was noted that the ordinance has a “grandfather” clause, so any current licenses would not be affected by the distance limitations between bars/liquor sales and churches or schools.


Page 17 of 21

Council Member Ratti asked about the appeal process. Mr. Riley noted that an approval cannot be appealed to the Council [because the applicant has met all the requirements], but there are procedures for appealing a denial or a revocation of a license. He noted that if someone wanted to appeal an approval, it would have to be done through litigation in court. Council Member Schmitt suggested that staff look at a future amendment to grandfather an existing use for 90 days, similar to the provisions the planning process—if someone abandons a building site for more than 90 days and it was a non-conforming use, then they loose that use. He also suggested that in the denial letter, if there are any denials, the appellants rights are spelled out. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed municipal code amendment. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. Council Member Ratti expressed concern regarding the lack of public notice for the liquor licenses, now that they will no long be on the Council agendas and the only way they will know about a license is when they start selling liquor in an establishment. Ms. Chavez stated the ordinance retains the ability of any community member to protest a license. In response to questions, Mr. Riley noted that there is no public notice required for a liquor license. There are criteria which an applicant must meet in order to receive a license and once they have meet all the requirements, they are entitled to receive a license. For constitutional reasons, a member of the public cannot protest a liquor license if the applicant meets all the criteria. Licenses are issued on an objective basis, based on the ordinance. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Bill No. 2595 (Ordinance No. 2423). Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items:

8.1 Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Approval of Resolution No.

3138, PCN09004 – Master Plan Amendment request from Reynen & Bardis (The Foothills), LLC to change the land use designation from 10 du/acre (dwelling units per acre) to PF (Public Facility) on a site approximately 8.1 acres in size generally located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Vista Boulevard and Passage Drive in the Foothills at Wingfield Springs Planned Development (Time: 4:29:35 p.m.)

Associate Planner Chere’ Jigour displayed a map of the site and stated that this master plan amendment is being requested by the Washoe County School District in anticipation of building an elementary school at the project site. She noted that the parcel is located in a location that will allow students to walk to school. Prior to development the project will require an amendment to the Foothills at Wingfield development handbook. Staff and the Planning Commission are recommending approval of this request.


Page 18 of 21

Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed master plan amendment. Mr. Andy Durling of Wood Rogers, representing the applicant, noted that they were in agreement with staff’s recommendation of approval. There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed. Council Member Carrigan thanked the School District for changing the location of the proposed school from La Posada to this new location—it is a much better place to put an elementary school. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve Resolution No. 3138, a resolution certifying the Master Plan Amendment associated with PCN09004, based on findings MP1 through MP3 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

8.2 PCN09006, Public Hearing, discussion and possible action on Resolution No.

3139, a Master Plan Amendment request from The Foothills at Wingfield, LLC to change the land use designation from 2 du/ac (dwelling units per acre) to General Commercial (GC) on a site approximately 5.0 acres in size located on 6500 Spanish Springs Road, just east of the Golden Eagle Regional Park, Sparks, NV (Time: 3:32:46 p.m.)

Senior Planner Tim Thompson noted that the five acres consists of two parcels located directly to the east of the Golden Eagle Regional Park. Last year the 60 acres to the north of the park went through a similar master plan amendment process. The applicant for this process is the same and it is their intent to incorporate these five acres into that existing handbook. However, because this site is only five acres, it may not be suitable to go through a planned development handbook process, so development could occur through standard zoning, as this project evolves. Mr. Thompson stated that the site is currently master planned at two dwelling units per acre and the request to change it to general commercial. Staff believes that this request is consistent with the surrounding uses because the general commercial requirements state that the designation is suitable next to public recreation facilities. Staff is recommending approval of this request. Council Member Schmitt asked if there was any public comment on this request at the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Thompson responded he did not believe there was. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed master plan amendment. Mr. Andy Durling of Wood Rogers, representing the applicant, noted that they were in agreement with staff’s recommendation of approval.


Page 19 of 21

There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Resolution No. 3139, a resolution certifying the Master Plan Amendment associated with PCN09006, on a site approximately 5 acres from 2 du/ac (two dwelling units per acres) to General Commercial (GC), adopting findings MP1 through MP4 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

8.3 Public Hearing, review and possible certification by Resolution No. 3140 of a

master plan amendment from the City of Sparks and City of Reno to change the land use designation of OS/RR (Open Space/Rural Reserve) to PF (Public Facilities) for a site approximately 247 acres located at 8500 Clean Water Way (Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility) (Time: 3:35:41 p.m.)

Senior Planner Karen Melby noted that this property is occupied by the sewer treatment plant and the intent of the master plan amendment is to begin the process of annexing (and eventually rezoning it) into the City of Sparks. The master plan amendment is necessary to establish a use which coincides with the existing land use (sewer treatment plant). This new land use designation is appropriate for this location because the sewer treatment plant has been located on this property for a long time and uses have developed around it. The Planning Commission and staff are recommending approval of this master plan amendment. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed amendment. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve Resolution No. 3140, a master plan amendment associated with PCN07056, based on findings MP1 through MP4 and the facts supporting these findings set forth in the staff report. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

8.4 PCN09005, Public Hearing, review of staff recommendations, discussion and

possible action on Resolution #3141, a Master Plan Amendment requests from Red Hawk Land Company, LLC:

A. To change the land use designation from General Commercial (GC) to Tourist Commercial (TC) on a site approximately 20.5 acres in size generally located east of Pyramid Highway, north of the Lazy 5 Park within the Tierra Del Sol Planned Development, Sparks, NV

B. To change the land use designation from Tourist Commercial (TC) to 5 du/ac (dwelling units per acre), on a site approximately 27 acres in size generally located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Vista Boulevard and Wingfield Hills Road in the Wingfield Springs Planned Development, Sparks, NV (Time: 4:38:19 p.m.)

This item was withdrawn from the Agenda. However, the law firm of Holland & Hart submitted a four page letter with attachments, dated April 8, 2009, and requested that it be included in the


Page 20 of 21

record of the meeting. The letter and attachments are hereby made part of the record by being included in the meeting backup. Mr. Allen Fuller e-mailed comments to the City Manager regarding item 8.4. He requested that his comments be included in the record of the meeting. His e-mail was printed out and is hereby made a part of the record by being included in the meeting backup. 9. Comments:

9.1 *From the Council and City Manager Council Member Ratti gave a verbal disclosure as follows: NRS 279.454 VERBAL DISCLOSURE--Pursuant to NRS 279.454, I must disclose that my home is located within a redevelopment area of the City and that I have an ownership interest in the property. As required by the statute this disclosure must be reflected in the minutes of this meeting and be filed with the City Clerk in writing. NRS279.454 WRITTEN DISCLOSURE—My home is located at 535 4th Street, Sparks, NV 89431. This address is located within a redevelopment area of the City of Sparks. I presently have an ownership interest in this property. This interest existed before my election to the Sparks City Council and appointment to the Sparks Redevelopment Agency, and in no way runs contrary to the previsions of NRS 279.454. Signed and filed this 13th day of April, 2009. Julia Ratti, Sparks City Council Member, Ward 1. Ms. Ratti explained that the reason for this disclosure is because there was a question as to whether or not she and her husband could rent out their old home if they purchased a new home due to the law that states that an agent of the redevelopment agency cannot own investment property within a redevelopment district if it was not owned prior to being elected to the City Council. Council Member Ratti also noted that she and her husband, along with employees from Best Buy and the Rock Band “Sinister Scene” cleaned Wedekind Park and announced that donations to support this clean up can be made on-line at www.eco.net. Council Member Schmitt asked if the City Council could appeal item 8.4. City Attorney Adams noted that an appeal rests solely in the hands of the proponent; however, the City Council can, independently and unilaterally, ask that the matter be brought to the City Council for review. Council Member Schmitt then made a request that this item come before the City Council for review. City Attorney Adams noted that if a request comes from a Council Member it has to be in writing. However, the Mayor can make a verbal request. Mayor Martini then requested, under Sparks Municipal Code 20.07.030(c), a review by the City Council of the April 2, 2009, decision of the Sparks Planning Commission denying a master plan amendment associated with PCNA09005. He noted the request is being made within 21 days of the commission’s decision and he directed the City Manager to place this item on a future agenda. City Attorney Adams noted that if the proponent requested an appeal, the two requests would be merged into one hearing. Council Member Salerno gave a verbal disclosure as follows: NRS 279.454 VERBAL DISCLOSURE--Pursuant to NRS 279.454, I must disclose that the building my business is


Page 21 of 21

situated in is located within a redevelopment area of the City and that I have an ownership interest in the property. As required by the statute this disclosure must be reflected in the minutes of this meeting and be filed with the City Clerk in writing. NRS279.454 WRITTEN DISCLOSURE—My business, Nevada Forms and Printing, is located at 639 Pyramid Way. This address is located within a redevelopment area of the City of Sparks. I presently have an ownership interest in this property. This interest existed before my election to the Sparks City Council and appointment to the Sparks Redevelopment Agency, and in no way runs contrary to the previsions of NRS 279.454. Signed and filed this 13th day of April, 2009. Phil Salerno, Sparks City Council Member, Ward 2. Councilman Schmitt asked for clarification on what disclosures are needed when the TOD (Transit Oriented Development) Corridor criteria comes before the Council for review, because there are many relationships between City Council Members and businesses, etc., along this proposed corridor. Attorney Adams noted that we have procedures to follow in the event one or more Council Members need to abstain from this vote. City Manager Carey advised there are current openings on the Parks and Recreation Commission and applications will be received through April. There will be openings in June on the Civil Service Commission, Reno Tahoe Airport Authority Board of Trustees, Sparks Advisory Committee for the Disabled and the Sparks Parks & Recreation Commission; applications will be accepted on-line through June 2009. 10. *Adjournment (Time: 5:09:23 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:46:55 p.m. _______________________________ Mayor __________________________________ City Clerk >>>

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 3:00 P.M. Monday, April 27, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:00:34 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Pro tempore Ron Schmitt at 3:00 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:00:42 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Council Member Ron Smith, ABSENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:00:54 p.m.) The invocation was given by Pastor Ron Arnold from Our Savior Lutheran Church. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:01:55 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Ron Schmitt. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:02:21 p.m.) None. Approval of the Agenda Time: 3:02:29 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. Community Development Director Neil Krutz noted that the applicant has requested that Item 8.3 be continued to the May 11, 2009, City Council meeting. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: None. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Proclamation – City of Sparks Crime Victims’ Rights Week (Time: 3:03:47 p.m.)

Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming April 26 – May 2, 2009 as City of Sparks Crime Victims’ Rights Week in recognition of our commitment to helping victims of crime rebuild their lives through supportive services and victim compensation. The proclamation was accepted by Jennifer Harp, Sparks Police Department Victim Advocate

4.2 Commendation to Lorentzen family singers (Time: 3:07:145 p.m.)

Mayor Martini read a commendation recognizing the many accomplishments of the Lorentzen

Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting for April 27, 2009

Page 2 of 13

family with regard to music. Community Relations Officer Adam Mayberry played a short video show casing the talents of the family. The commendation was accepted by John and Laura Lorentzen and their children.

4.3 Presentation – 2009 Sparks Public Attitude Survey Results (Time: 3:19:54

p.m.) Community Relations Officer Adam Mayberry and Administrative Analyst Teresa Gardner gave a power point presentation outlining the results of the 8th Annual Sparks Public attitude Survey. Mayor Martini noted that the survey was very clear that the citizens of Sparks do not want to consolidate with Reno and Washoe County. City Manager Shaun Carey thanked Ms. Gardner on the excellent job she did in conducting the survey and presented her with a bouquet of flowers in appreciation of her efforts. Ms. Gardner accepted the flowers and stated this survey was a team effort. She thanked staff for all the support she received while conducting the survey.

4.4 Certificates of Appreciation in Recognition of Volunteer Work for the City of

Sparks 2009 Public Attitude Survey (Time: 3:39:52 p.m.) Mayor Martini presented certificates of appreciation to the volunteers who worked on the 2009 Public Attitude Survey.

5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:42:33 p.m.) Items 5.1 and 5.11 were pulled for separate discussion and vote. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.9. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

5.1 Report of Claims and Bills approved for payment and appropriation transfers for the period March 26, 2009, through April 8, 2009

5.2 Consideration and possible approval of a business license penalty refund for

Sushi Time, LLC An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending the City Council approve refund of the business license penalty paid by Sushi Time, LLC. The owner, Mr. Tam, is claiming that he did not receive the renewal notices that the City mailed to his business. Staff is recommending a refund of penalties paid in the amount of $341.07.

5.3 Consideration and possible approval of a business license penalty refund for Sparks Pancakes, Inc.

An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending the City Council approve refund of the business license penalty paid by Sushi Time, LLC. April Stumbough, the bookkeeper for the business, states that the renewal form and check were mailed to the State Department of taxation, resulting in the City receiving the payment late and the business receiving a 50% penalty. Staff is recommending a refund of penalties paid in the amount of


Page 3 of 13

$739.00. 5.4 Consideration and possible approval of a business license penalty refund for

Asset Enterprises, LLC dba: Aloha Inn An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending the City Council approve refund of the business license penalty paid by Aloha Inn. The business’ renewal form and check were mailed in on time; however, there was an error in their calculations, resulting in an underpayment of $70.00. The license renewal forms and check were returned to the business, per Sparks’ procedure; but there was not enough time for the business to return the form to Sparks before the 25% penalty was triggered. The business has been licensed since 2006 and has not been late before. Staff is recommending a refund of penalties paid in the amount of $265.00.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of a request for refund of business

license fees for J & L Windows Inc. An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending the City Council approve a request from J&L Windows for a refund of excess business license fees. The Controller, Dawna Lance, explained that she included the gross receipts for other counties when she paid the Sparks license fees for 2005, 2006 and 2007. She is requesting a refund of excess business license fees paid for those years in the total amount of $4,012.88. Staff is recommending approval of the overpayment.


license fees for World Wide Technology Inc. An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending the City Council approve a request from World Wide Technology for a refund of excess business license fees. Linda Sokolich from the tax department is requesting a refund of excess business license fees paid in error based on the calculation for gross receipts shipped out of Sparks rather into Sparks. Staff is recommending approval of the overpayment in the amount of $19,788.80 for fiscal years 2005 through 2008.

5.7 Consideration and possible approval of the Raw Sewage Pump Adjustable Frequency Drive Project, Bid #08/09-023, PWP #WA-2009-196 at the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility to RHP Mechanical of Reno in the amount of $120,142

An agenda item from Treatment Plant Maintenance Superintendent Alan Minor recommending the City Council award this bid to RHP Mechanical of Reno, the only bidder for this project. The current adjustable frequency drives are approximately 15 years old and it is becoming increasingly difficult and costly to locate and order replacement parts. Funds are available for this replacement purchase.


for reimbursement with the Regional Transportation Commission in the amount of $75,900 to replace storm drain facilities as part of the Freeport Boulevard and Steneri Way Rehabilitation Project

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Andrew Hummel recommending the City Council approve an interlocal agreement with RTC (Regional Transportation Commission) to replace storm drain


Page 4 of 13

facilities as part of their rehabilitation project for Freeport Boulevard and Steneri Way. Incorporating City of Sparks’ sewer replacements into the RTC project will reduce traffic delays and result in a small cost savings to the City.

5.9 Consideration and possible approval of the bid award for installation of

replacement Motor Control Center #3 at the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility in the amount of $26,249.62 to Briggs Electric, Inc.

An agenda item from Treatment Plant Maintenance Superintendent Alan Minor recommending the City Council award this bid to Briggs Electric as the lowest bidder for this project. The purchase of the replacement motor control center was previously approved. This bid will complete the installation of the motor. Funds are available for this installation.

5.10 Consideration and possible approval of a Memorandum of Understanding

for the repayment of Tourism & Marketing funds to the Reno Sparks Convention & Visitors Authority (Time: 3:43:15 p.m.)

An agenda item from City Manager Shaun Carey recommending the City Council approve a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the repayment of the overpayment tourism and marketing funds to the City of Sparks by the RSCVA (Reno Sparks Convention and Visitors Authority). Council Member Carrigan asked the City Attorney where we stood legally on a MOU when the other party does not keep the agreement. He questioned Item 2, which states that the MOU is valid until the City repays the RSCVA, stating he felt this tied the hands of future City Councils. City Attorney Adams stated this was one of the proposed amendments from the RSCVA. Sparks wanted to have a five year term, subject to an automatic renewal, for just that reason. However, the debt has accrued during this City Council, so he did not feel that the MOU tied the hands of future City Councils to pay off the debt that we have incurred to date. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the MOU with the RSCVA. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

5.11 Review and possible approval of the proposed three year Sponsorship

Agreement between the City of Sparks and Hot August Nights, Inc. (Time: 3:45:04 p.m.)

An agenda item from Parks and Recreation Director Stan Sherer recommending the City Council approve a three-year sponsorship agreement for the Hot August Nights event. Council Member Carrigan said he had a question regarding why the Hot August Nights (HAN) event does not go through the Tourism and Marketing Committee (Tourmark) like the other events have to do. Mr. Sherer responded that HAN has not asked the Tourmark for subsidies like the other events. Historically, the Silver Club was the major sponsor of HAN and since the time Tourmark was formed, the Silver Club backed out of their commitment and the City assumed the role of co-sponsor of the event. In all likelihood, it is a timing issue, because we were already on board as partners with HAN when Tourmark was formed. Mr. Carrigan stated that he felt this event should go through Tourmark before it comes before the Council.


Page 5 of 13

A motion as made by Council Member Carrigan to refer this agreement to the Marketing and Tourism Committee. Attorney Adams stated he did not know if Tourmark had the jurisdictional power to enter into a sponsorship agreement on behalf of the City of Sparks. Mr. Carrigan stated that Tourmark has to come back to the Council for approval of their recommendations for funding. He said he is asking that this go through Tourmark so that everyone has to follow the same procedures for Special Events. Council Member Schmitt seconded the motion for discussion, stating he understood Mr. Carrigan’s point about everyone following the same procedure. Council Member Salerno stated that he agreed that everyone following the same procedure was a good idea; however, this was a separate issue from approval of the agreement because only the approval was on the agenda. Council Member Ratti said it was a question of timing: while she agreed that we should move all special events funding through one committee for a uniform process, she was concerned that any delay in approval of the agreement would jeopardize the event. Mr. Sherer noted that delay would certainly hinder HAN’s ability to solicit other sponsors for this event. Council Member Ratti proposed approving a one year sponsorship agreement and then in the next fiscal cycle all the events planning can be integrated into one process. Mayor Martini said he felt we should not hold up the approval because this is a very important event for the City and for the businesses in the downtown area. He agreed that it should go through the Tourmark Committee. The one year option was a good one, but we need to let them know that they are going to have money for this year and how much they are going to have as soon as possible. City Manager Carey noted that this is an agreement that staff has negotiated, with the approval of the City Attorney. He said we can look to the Council and the community for guidance on priorities and how it wants to do business. He pointed out that this event did not make a request for tourism and marketing funds and he urged caution in referring events to committees that would interject others into the negotiation process, because this does affect the Council’s ability to act as a legislative body. There was some question as to the legality of requiring this event to go through the Tourmark Committee and whether it was being inferred that this event was getting “special treatment” by not having to go through the committee. Mr. Sherer again explained the history of this event and emphasized that the contract with HAN evolved over several years and that it was important to have a multi-year contract to ensure the event would be held in Sparks. He also noted that the costs to the City for sponsoring this event have decreased every year, per the terms of the previous agreements. City Attorney Adams said that legally the Council could send the agreement to the Tourmark Committee for their input to the City Council, but he did not know if Tourmark could engage in substantive work such as modification of the contract, etc. rather than just giving the Council recommendations regarding the propriety of the City supporting or endorsing a particular event.


Page 6 of 13

Mr. Adams stated it was not a good idea to approve only one year of a three-year contract, because many of the terms, conditions, and obligations in the agreement were contemplated over a three-year period, rather than just a singe year. Mr. Sherer noted that this agreement was different from previous agreements because it is a flat-fee commitment and we have no production responsibilities and less dedicated staff time to this event. The terms of the agreement do not vary from year to year. Council Member Carrigan then withdrew his motion. Mayor Martini asked for another motion. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno to accept and approve the proposed HAN sponsorship agreement as outlined by staff. Council Member Ratti seconded the motion for discussion. Ms. Ratti asked if there were substantive reasons why this event had an agreement and the other events did not and this event was treated differently in the legal way we approached the funding. Mr. Sherer stated there was not substantive reason other than the history and the shift of sponsorship from the Silver Club to being co-produced by the City to the City being a sponsor and not a producer of the event. He noted that this is an incredibly large event and the venue we provide for HAN is very unique and one of, if not the favorite venue in the region. These are all items that contributed to the negotiations and this proposal. Ms. Ratti agreed that this was an important event for our downtown. However, she still felt that in the future our special events sponsorship should be streamlined and handled similarly from a legal standpoint. Council Member Carrigan asked if the motion was for a three-year contract or a one year contract. The response was it was for a three-year contract. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve the three-year agreement. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, YES. Council Members Carrigan, Schmitt, NO. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion Failed. Council Member Carrigan made a motion to approve a one-year agreement. Council Member Ratti seconded the motion. City Manager Carey cautioned that the Council might want to find out whether a one-year agreement was acceptable to the other party to this agreement (HAN). The Executive Director of HAN stated that we need to look at not only the costs associated with the agreement, but also the attribute of this event to the community. In terms of its size and stature—In addition to 10 hours of ESPN television, six ½ hour shows on FOX, two hours of live show on ESPN, and two hours of show on BBC, we have been given additional hours on the SPEED channel on a program called “Cut Shop Rebuild It.” In total this amounts to 20 hours of television that will emanate from this region and will provide outreach at a cost that we couldn’t afford to pay for. Registration for 2010 started in April of this year and they plan events one year ahead of time. Looking at a one year agreement does not give them the assurance they need to plan ahead for this event. He said they have registrants from Brittan, Hawaii, and Australia and they prefer a three-year contract. He noted that there is no escalation in costs to the City for the three years—they just need the three years for their long-term planning.


Page 7 of 13

A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve a one-year agreement. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, NO. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion Failed. Mayor Martini asked if staff now works out a new agreement with HAN. City Attorney Adams stated that basically the City has made a counter offer and the contract will have to be renegotiated and the other party will have to agree to a new contract. Council Member Schmitt asked if the renegotiated contract would have to come back to the City Council. Mr. Adams stated that essentially there is no contract now and once it was renegotiated between the parties, the new agreement would have to come back to the Council for approval. Council Member Carrigan asked for clarification that the Council could only approve or disapprove a three-year contract. Mr. Adams responded the Council could approve or disapprove a three-year contract subject to a modification of a major term of that contract. A modification or amendment would require the assent of both parties. Council Member Carrigan said the only thing he wanted to do was to make sure that everyone is being treated equally, but he did not want to “trash” this contract because Hot August is second most popular event in this city. He was only trying to answer questions he received regarding why HAN was getting 100% of what they were asking and others only received 50%. The HAN representative stated it makes if very difficult to proceed with their planning with a contract short-term contract. He said the board has instructed him to look for alternatives if they can’t come to terms with the City of Sparks; however, they do not want to do this. Council Member Carrigan stated he feels that HAN is “holding a gun to his head.” The HAN representative said that is not their intention. He asked the City Attorney how they would handle this if they wanted the first vote to go away. City Attorney Adams stated the Council could vote to reconsider. Council Member Schmitt said this is an example of what happens when people are treated differently. He asked what support HAN received from the RSCVA and the City of Reno. The HAN representative stated they received no funding from the RSCVA and the split the costs with Reno—they pay 60% or 65% of the city services bill and Reno pays the rest. The overall bill for Reno is about $600,000 per year. Council Member Salerno noted that the RSCVA provides facilities for HAN to use. The HAN representative stated that they pay rent to the RSCVA for the use of those facilities. Council Member Ratti said she was disappointed with HAN’s position on the one year agreement; however, because we do think this event is important, she suggested the vote be reconsidered and a two year contract be proposed. The HAN representative stated they would accept a two-year agreement. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Salerno to reconsider the vote to approve a one-year agreement. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, ABSTAIN. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.


Page 8 of 13

A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve the agreement for a two-year period. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, ABSTAIN. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried. 6. General Business:


Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll and Government Affairs Analyst Kathy Clewett provided an update of what is happening at the Legislature as follows:

• AB458—Assemblywoman Buckley’s bill for taking money for education will be heard on April 30th

• SB201—also known as the RTC5 bill will be heard on May 5th • AB443—the City of Reno and Sparks election ward bill was heard this afternoon in

Senate Government Affairs. Assemblywoman Leslie presented the bill and at the end of the discussion Senator Lee asked Rob Joiner to speak. We basically have two options—Senator Lee wanted to know if the City of Sparks wanted to opt out of the bill or if not, if we stay on the bill (which has been amended by Reno) and if it goes before the public for a vote, we would then like that vote to go back through the Charter Committee for a charter change.

o Ms. Ratti said she felt that staff has come up with a good compromise in going through our Charter Committee if it is approved by a vote of the citizens

o Several Council Members expressed concern that our process is being circumvented by the Legislature

o Ms. Clewett noted that we have a week to get a response back to Senator Lee o It was noted that the bill, as amended, would be put before the voters in 2010 and,

if approved, would take effect in 2012 o It appears we have no choice, so we might as well get what we can out of the

bill—if we can get it back to our charter at least we will have input into how we want to do this

A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to request that the issue go through our Charter Committee if approved by the voters. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, YES. Council Members Carrigan, Schmitt, NO. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion failed. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to opt out of the bill and if that doesn’t work, then we put it up to a vote of the people and not go through the Charter Committee—because there is no use having the Charter Committee look at it whether the people say yes or no. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, NO. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

• SB210—first revision of a campaign bill which requires elected officials to report as in the past, but also allows for a charitable contribution through the distributed school fund. It is being provided for review and input—no action is needed at this time

• AB415--Last minute employee benefit program bill defining the contribution for the next


Page 9 of 13

two years. • AB311—Fluoridation bill--went before the senate finance committee last Friday

morning. o Presentation from TMWA regarding costs

$90 per house $1.00 per month O&M, once the fluoridation is in the water

o Testimony was cut short o Staff has provided a letter regarding our concerns

Long term water quality issues of adding fluoride in the water • Effect on aquatic environments • Water quality standards • There could be consequences to the waste water, based on the long

term health of the river and we could be required to remove the fluoride at some point

• The current natural standards of fluoride in the Truckee River above Reno and Sparks are very low

Cost to remove it would be very expensive and energy intensive o Working on an amendment which would take this issue back to a vote of the

people in 2010 o TMWA is opposing this bill because the people have already voted no on adding

fluoride in our water supply o The Board Health voted to remain neutral based on recognizing the health

benefits, but at the same time recognizing the will of the people A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to oppose the bill because the people already voted for no fluoride in the water in 2002. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.2 Consideration and possible approval of City Manager’s Budget recommendation for City of Sparks Final Budget 2009-2010 (Time: 4:59:05 p.m.)

City Manager Shaun Carey noted that a public hearing on the tentative budget will be held on Tuesday, May 19, 2009, at 9:00 a.m. Following the public hearing, the final budget for the next fiscal year will be submitted to the State, as required. Mr. Carey then reviewed the budget recommendations for the next fiscal year, as outlined in the staff report. He emphasized that the budget recommendations do not require layoffs of additional employees and he thanked the employees and council for the many sacrifices they are making to position this City to have a positive path forward in these difficult economic times, with no additional layoffs. He said we cannot predict for certain what the coming year may bring, but staff has worked with dedication to design wage concessions that produced over $1.5 million in budget reductions. Mr. Carey emphasized that the tentative budget does not contain any new needs; with the exception of the additional police positions that the Council approved for the application of a grant under the COPS program—the services and supplies were included in the budget, but no new positions.


Page 10 of 13

Mr. Carey discussed the issue of the Code Enforcement Program, stating there is one alternative in the budget, should the Council wish to address the problem we have with code enforcement across the City. This program affects every neighborhood in the City and the amount of problems we have seen are just beyond the abilities of two Code Enforcement Officers. However, with the wage concessions and contributions being made by our employees, he did not include a new position. Council Ron Smith is not present because he is working on securing funding for the Truckee River Flood Project, but he did ask Mr. Carey to report that he did not support the alternative to the budget because we have had layoffs and we are asking for so many concessions to our employees. Mr. Carey emphasized that staff has made a direct effort to bring the expenditures under control in the Cityworks Department. We have seen a tremendous erosion of revenues in the program. In 2005 there were over 2,500 homes built in the City of Sparks and we had the staff to efficiently inspect, plan, and engineer those facilities. But the development of our community is now greatly challenged and so far this year we have only issued permits for 90 new single family homes. The workforce has been scaled back from 84 employees down to 22 employees. However, for the safety of our community, this budget requires that the general fund make a $1.2 million transfer to this fund to ensure we have the essential services in this department. This contribution can be engineered so that it can be paid back to the general fund in the future, when development returns to Sparks. Council Member Schmitt agreed that the transfer from the general fund to the development services fund was necessary; however, he felt that there should be more accountability for the money and how it is spent—put the funds in contingency and draw on it as a “line of credit” when needed. Council Member Ratti stated the additional Code Enforcement Officer was her request, stating that we are not making a lot of progress right now in the redevelopment areas, but we need to continue to reduce blight and code enforcement is a way to continue to do this. Because most of the funds would come from redevelopment, an additional code enforcement officer would only impact the general fund about $40,000 and this is a way for us to get ahead of the problems coming in the future. Council asked if this additional officer would be limited to the redevelopment areas, since that is where the funding is coming from. Mr. Carey stated that the employee would certainly spend a great deal of time in these areas because there is a lot of work to be done, but we aren’t drawing any lines with regard to what areas receive enforcement. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the tentative budget as recommended by the City Manager; to include the alternative for code enforcement and incorporate Mr. Schmitt’s request for accountability by using the contingency fund to transfer the money. Council Members Ratti, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, NO. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried. Council Member Carrigan noted he did not support the motion because the citizen survey did not list code enforcement as a high priority and if we were going to fill a position, it should one with


Page 11 of 13

a higher priority. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the tentative budget as recommended by the City Manager and incorporate Mr. Schmitt’s request for accountability by using the contingency fund to transfer the money. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried. Council Member Schmitt commented that he interpreted the results of the survey differently, with the high foreclosure rate being high in importance—he said he felt the appearance of neighborhoods was very important. He requested that the issue of an additional code enforcement officer come back for Council Consideration after the close of the legislative session. Mayor Martini noted that the Council would lose its quorum at 5:30 and asked that items 6.6 through 6.8 be heard out of order because a quorum was required for approval.

6.3 Presentation, discussion and possible direction or approval of American

Recovery and Reinvestment Act (AARA) (Time: 5:38:30 p.m.) This item was continued to another meeting.

6.4 Consideration and possible appointment of Patricia Kuehl to the Truckee

River Fund Advisory Committee (Time: 5:38:38 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the appointment of Patricia Kuehl to the Truckee River Fund Advisory Committee. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.5 First Reading and possible discussion of Bill No. 2605, an Ordinance adding

an additional classification of business to Chapter 5.20 of the Sparks Municipal Code, pertaining to license fees for specific businesses and other matters properly related thereto (Time: 5:39:06 p.m.)

City Clerk Linda Patterson read Bill No. 2657 by title, an ordinance amending Section 5.20 of the Sparks Municipal Code, specifically adding Section 5.20.050: “Solid Waste Container Rental and associated hauling of solid waste(s) or recyclable materials;” and providing other matters properly related thereto. Mayor Martini announced that the public hearing and second reading of this bill will be conducted at the regular City Council Meeting of May 11, 2009.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: None 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items:


Page 12 of 13

8.1 Public Hearing, Second Reading, discussion and possible approval of PCN09007 Bill No. 2604, an ordinance for an Annexation request, in accordance with the City of Sparks 7-year annexation program, from Stonefield Inc. for a site approximately 375 acres in size. Upon Annexation the zoning would convert from a Washoe County Designation of Tourist Commercial to a City of Sparks zoning designation of TC (Tourist Commercial) within the City of Sparks Sphere of Influence generally located in the East Truckee River Canyon north of Interstate 80 and Waltham Way approximately 6 miles east of the Sparks city limits (Time: 5:39:34 p.m.)

Mayor Martini noted that this item would be continued to the next meeting; however, because a public hearing was noticed, a public hearing would be held and the Council would hear comments on this issue at this time. The public hearing was opened and the following individuals spoke regarding the proposed annexation request: Eric Holland, representing Voter’s for Sensible Growth, spoke in opposition to the annexation because he believed it did not follow the State of Nevada statutes regarding non-contiguous annexations. There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to continue PCN09007, Bill No. 2604, to the May 11, 2009, City Council Meeting. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried. 6. General Business (Continued):

6.6 Possible motion to adjourn to a Closed Door Session to review labor issues (Closed per NRS 288.220) (Time: 5:31:58 p.m.) (This item was heard out of order.)

A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to adjourn to a closed door session. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 5:31. Council Member Schmitt requested that the Redevelopment Agency Meeting be conducted at this time because there was an item that required a quorum and it was not approved, the developer would be in default on their agreement with the City. The Redevelopment Agency Meeting was then conducted at this time. After the Redevelopment Agency Meeting adjourned, Council Member Carrigan asked if other Council Members had questions regarding the labor contracts. No other Council Members had questions, so Council Member Carrigan said that in the interest of time, he would forgo his questions and therefore the Council could dispense with the closed door session. The Council Meeting was reconvened at 5:36 p.m.


Page 13 of 13

6.7 Discussion, consideration, and possible approval of an amendment to the IAFF 1265 contract July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2010 (Time: 5:37:18 p.m.) (This item was heard out of order.)

A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the amendment to the July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2010, agreement between the City of Sparks and the International Association of Fire Fighters Local 1265. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.8 Discussion, consideration, and possible approval of an amendment to the

Fire Chief Officers Contract July 1, 20005 through June 30, 2010 (Time: 5:37:49 p.m.) (This item was heard out of order.)

A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the amendment to the July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2010, agreement between the City of Sparks and the Fire Chief Officers Unit. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 5:43:11 p.m.) Councilman Salerno noted that in a letter to the editor in the newspaper regarding the City closing the Sparks Senior Center. Council Member Ratti noted that the center is funded by Washoe County and they were able to go into a reserve account so there will be no cuts to the Senior Services Center in Sparks this year; however, the board is working with the citizens who use the center to increase volunteers and participation so that there are some alternatives for the 2010 budget if the economy does not turn around. Council Member Salerno asked that staff provide a story in the Sparks section of the newspaper to advise our citizens that this is not true. 10. *Adjournment (Time: 5:44:34 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:44 p.m. _______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________ City Clerk >>>

Page 1 of 21

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 3:00 P.M. Monday, May 11, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:01:31 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:00 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:01:36 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:01:52 p.m.) The invocation was given by Bishop Ron Zanger from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:02:33 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Phillip Salerno. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:03:05 p.m.) Pamela and Brad Culbertson, owners of Baskin Robins, spoke regarding them being excluded from the Hot August Nights and Rib Cook-off events due to another ice cream manufacturer being an exclusive sponsor at those events. Mrs. Colbertson stated it was not fair that local businesses be excluded from local events, particularly because the City is a large sponsor and contributes a lot of money to our special events. Mayor Martini asked staff to contact the producers of those events to clarify the rules and the process for becoming a vendor at outdoor events. Council Member Schmitt asked for a report on which local businesses are being allowed to vend at our special events. Mrs. Shirley Bertschinger spoke regarding the findings of the Ethics Commission banning Mr. Carrigan from voting on any issues dealing with the Lazy 8 Development and the subsequent filing of an emergency petition filed with the Nevada Supreme Court to allow Mr. Carrigan to vote. She asked why the City did not file an emergency petition to allow Mr. Salerno to also vote. Ms. Bertschinger said she felt the City was “stacking the deck” in favor of the applicant, Mr. Whittemore and that the citizens of Sparks did not need or want this proposed casino. Council Member Carrigan stated he is getting tired of Ms. Bertschinger “beating him up” in her comments and not defending himself against her accusations. He went on to clarify that the only reason the City did not file on behalf of Mr. Salerno is because he asked the City Attorney to file an emergency petition and Mr. Salerno didn’t. Mayor Martini asked City Attorney Adams to explain the Ethics Commission ruling and the filing of the emergency petition. Mr. Adams explained that Council Member Carrigan’s situation involved what was deemed to be a prior restraint of his first amendment right to represent his constituents and vote in accordance to their desires. Council Member Salerno’s situation differed solely because it was a stipulated agreement with the ethics commission and something that foreclosed any further legal proceedings.

Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting for May 11, 2009

Page 2 of 21

Ted Kremps explained that he was unable to attend the public hearing scheduled for 6:30 this evening and asked the Council to affirm the Planning Commission’s denial of the Lazy 8 master plan amendment request. Mike Pate of Sentry Security Systems spoke in favor of revising Sparks’ ordinances to allow certain types of electric security fences. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:20:40 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. Items 6.6 and 6.7 were continued to a future meeting. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: 3.1 Regular Meeting of April 13, 2009 (Time: 3:21:41 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 13, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Proclamation – National Public Works Week (Time: 3:21:41 p.m.) Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming May 17-23, 2009, as National Public Works Week in recognition of the contributions which public works officials make every day to our health, safety, comfort, and quality of life. The proclamation was accepted by the Public Works Director Wayne Seidel.

4.2 Proclamation – Older Americans Month (Time: 3:25:03 p.m.)

Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming May 2009, as Older Americans Month in honor of our older adults and professionals, family members and those who care for them. The proclamation was accepted Mr. Grady Tarbutton, Director of Washoe County Services.

4.3 Proclamation – Bike to Work Day (Time: 3:29:03 p.m.)

Council Member Ratti read a proclamation naming May 15, 2009, as Bike to Work Day in recognition of the many benefits of biking. The proclamation was accepted by Mr. Terry McAfee, representing the Northern Nevada Bike to Work Committee.

4.4 Presentation – Economic Development Authority of Western Nevada

(EDAWN) economic development report (Time: 3:31:04 p.m.) Mr. Chuck Alvey, President/CEO of EDAWN provided an update of the economic activities provided by EDAWN in the past year. Mr. Alvey stated that the City’s continued support will allow them with relocations, expansions, and outreach to prospective businesses in the coming year. He introduced some of the EDAWN Board of Trustees, also present at the meeting: Stan


Page 3 of 21

Thomas, Treasurer/Secretary; Randy Mellinger, Board Member; Julie Ardito, Director of Public Relations; Tina Iftiger, Director of Business Development; Ray McElroy, Director of Investor Development.

4.5 Presentation – All-Star Band’s trip to Longford, Ireland (Time: 3:43:10 p.m.) Mayor Martini noted that the Band teacher had a problem and was not able to attend the meeting today. Therefore, this item will be rescheduled for another meeting. Council Member Schmitt noted that the All Star Band is made up of band members from the three Sparks High Schools (Sparks, Reed, and Spanish Springs). About 75 band members will be spending a week at the Longford, Ireland Music Festival and will be the first marching band to appear at their festival. He said he received an e-mail last week saying that the writer was opposed to this because the money should be used for employee salaries. He clarified that the Tourism and Marketing dollars are regulated by the Nevada Revised Statutes and the funds cannot be spent for any employee salaries—the dollars can only be used for the promotion of tourism. He said if the City decides to contribute money to the bands to help with the expenses of the trip—it would not be funds that could be used for employee salaries. He emphasized that the City has not decided whether or not to contribute toward this trip. Council Member Salerno stated he sent out an e-mail saying he did not support donating money to this trip because he felt that it was not a good use of our tourism dollars.

4.6 Presentation and dedication of Artist and Sculptor David Johnson’s “The Rose of Justice” to the City of Sparks, City Attorney’s Office (Time: 3:45:28 p.m.)

Mr. David Johnson discussed the history of the carving and how it came to be donated to the City Attorney’s Office. He noted that the carvings are his “therapy.” City Attorney Chet Adams noted that Mr. Johnson is a local artist and donates his work to public entities on a regular basis.

5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:48:16 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.4. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


transfers for the period April 9, 2009, through April 22, 2009 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.

5.2 Consideration and possible approval of a contract for the provision of card-

lock fuel services between the City of Sparks and Western Energetix in the amount of $833,917

An agenda item Fleet Superintendent Ron Korman recommending the City Council approve a contract for card-lock fuel services. Prior to this contract, the City used the same contract utilized by Washoe County for this card-lock fuel system. Washoe County has recently changed providers; however, the City feels that maintaining a contractual relationship with Western Energetix will continue to provide fiscal and operational savings to the City over the new option


Page 4 of 21

chosen by Washoe County. Funds are budgeted within various departments for fuel expenses throughout the fiscal year.

5.3 Consideration and possible approval of Bid #09/08-025, an initial seven (7) month contract with the possibility of nine (9) six-month extensions to Kemira Water Solutions, Inc., for the annual amount of $594,592 to supply Ferric Chloride to the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility

An agenda item from Operations Superintendent Starlin Jones recommending the City Council award the bid for ferric chloride to Kemira Water Solutions as outlined. Ferric chloride is used in the water treatment process. Kemira Water Solutions was the lowest bidder.

5.4 Consideration and possible approval of the destruction/disposal of original building plans and associated documents that have been microfilmed

An agenda item from Director of Community Development Neil Krutz recommending the City Council grant approval for the destruction/disposal of the documents as requested. 6. General Business:

ANY ITEM ON THE 3:00 P.M. SESSION, NOT COMPLETED BY THE 6:30 P.M. SESSION WILL AUTOMATICALLY BE CONTINUED TO THE 6:30 P.M. SESSION.



Government Affairs Analyst Kathy Clewett and Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll provided an oral review of activities at the 2009 Nevada State Legislative Session as follows:

• May 15 is the last day for bill to come out of their respective committees • AB458 – ready to come out on the assembly floor

o Staff is working with Assemblywoman Buckley’s staff o Amendments are still being drafted

• SB201 – RTC 5 transportation bill o Will be heard tomorrow morning o Mayor Martini will be at the Legislature to support the bill

• SB213 – Sparks Charter Bill o Made it out of Assembly Government Affairs Committee this morning and is now

on the floor • President Obama approved the Federal Fiscal Year 2010 Budget last week

o Staff will provide a written update on the funding we expect to receive Council Member Schmitt said he received a phone call stating that there are bills now going through the legislature which would cause Sparks to receive a $1 million hit on our revenue by taking away property taxes from the City. Mr. Driscoll responded the main property tax bill that has been discussed at this point is AB543—it is a proposed 4% reduction from Clark County and from Washoe County. There have been lots of rumor and talk about options to this. We have not seen anything official (in writing) that asks for anything but the 4% from those two counties. There has been some talk about splitting that percentage between the counties and the cities. This bill is being worked on behind closed doors, so all we have right now is rumor. Mr. Schmitt


Page 5 of 21

expressed concern that if we were going to have to cut another $1 million from our budget, we need to do so now. City Manager Carey stated that if the State Legislature makes a revenue change that affects local government, we would have an opportunity to file an amended budget, and we would have until August 15th to do so. Council Member Carrigan asked staff to let the Council know right away when they hear about any legislation that takes away money from Sparks.

6.2 Consideration and Possible Acceptance of the US Department of Housing and Urban Development Special Project Grant for the Larry D. Johnson Community Center (Time: 3:55: p.m.)

Grant Administrator Tracy Wheeler noted that this is a special grant from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for $245,000 to assist the City with installation of solar panels at the community center. Mayor Martini asked now that we have the money to install them; how are we going to purchase the solar panels. Ms. Wheeler stated the project itself is a total of $414,000 and the City does have some funding allocated for the entire project. However, because it is an energy efficiency project, we have an opportunity to get reimbursed for those dollars through another program. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to accept a grant from HUD for the LDJ Community Center. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.3 Presentation, discussion and possible direction or approval of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) (CONTINUED FROM 4/27/09) (Time: 4:00:42 p.m.)

Government Affairs Analyst Kathy Clewett noted staff was asked to start monitoring the ARRA funds and what the City was going to be able to get. So far we have been able to determine that the City Engineer can get some funds, as well as the Sparks Police Department. City Engineer Pete Etchart stated the City of Sparks will be receiving an $840,000 direct allocation through the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant. It will be administered in a similar fashion to the Community Development Block Grant funds. The Federal Government is requiring an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy Plan that is due to them on June 25th. He noted he has provided a draft to the Council on what the plan is going to look like and that he will discuss specific strategies, objectives, and goals at the May 26th Council Meeting. Once the government has received our plan, they will have 120 days to review it. Once they approve our plan, we will be eligible to start receiving funds. Staff will continue to provide the Council with the latest information as it becomes available. Mr. Etchart stated he has provided the Council with an updated spreadsheet listing our proposed projects. There are four categories of projects we are proposing:

1. Energy efficiency and renewal energy opportunity audit a. a basic framework for our future projects on our permanent facilities


Page 6 of 21

2. Energy efficiency implementation projects a. Lighting b. Retrofit projects c. Traffic signals—replacing incandescent lights with LED lighting

3. Energy efficiency design projects a. We are not going to wait for the audit on these projects—we know they need to be

done i. Parking garage lighting replacements

ii. Boiler replacement at Alf Sorenson and maintenance facilities 4. Renewable energy design projects

a. Projects we want to go straight to design on i. Floatable tanks for the main building and maintenance building at the

Golden Eagle Regional Park Mr. Etchart noted that this is a multi-year funding source, so once we have the audit and designs, as we get more money we will invest more into renewable energy and efficiencies. We are also coordinating with Reno and Washoe County regarding applications for State fund and competitive EECBG funds. The State has received approximately $34 million in funds through the recovery act and their plan is due to the Federal Government this week. Once we see their plan, we will have a better idea of what we can do. There is $400 million available nation-wide in competitive energy efficiency and conservation block grants. The rules for these funds are not available yet, but we are doing our best to be ready to apply for these funds.

6.4 Possible direction to initiate a code amendment to allow for Electric fences as a permitted fencing material in the Industrial Zoning district (Time: 4:08:50 p.m.)

Associate Planner Jim Rundle said staff was asking for the City Council’s input to allow staff to begin researching a code amendment to allow electric fences. This would allow staff to research the issue and if it found to be feasible, a proposed code amendment would then have to go through the Planning Commission and City Council. Council Member Carrigan asked that staff include safety information in their research because it was guaranteed that someone would bring up the issue of kids accidentally coming in contact with the fencing. Council Member Schmitt noted that in our recent branding study there were several examples of resort areas with barbed wire draped around them and how uninviting it was to visitors to our community. He asked if it would be part of the research done by staff to look at fencing as a whole, including aesthetically pleasing fencing. Mr. Rundle stated that the research could entail any direction that Council chose to give to staff; however, staff was not anticipating an entire rewrite of the fencing ordinance for industrial and commercial areas. A discussion ensued regarding visibly pleasing fencing versus “barbed wire” fencing and what message a particular type of fencing gives to the community. Also discussed was whether or not “electric” fencing can be made to look aesthetically pleasing while still serving a security purpose. Mr. Rundle stated that staff would be happy to investigate this issue, along with electrical fencing, but he cautioned that it would take considerably more time to research the issue because the process


Page 7 of 21

would require a lot of additional input from property owners in the affected areas (commercial and industrial). Council Member Salerno asked if the issue of electric fences has been raised before. Mr. Rundle stated electric fences have been prohibited by the Sparks Municipal Code since his employment with the City; probably based on the technology that was available at that time. However, from what he has seen, the new type of fencing has enough power to make someone back off from the fence, but not strong enough to do actual harm. Council Member Schmitt asked that the fencing study be done in two phases—the first phase to change the code to allow electric fencing and the second phase to address the aesthetics of fencing in general. Council Member Ratti said she would like to request that staff also address the issue of access to buildings with electric fencing by emergency personnel. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to direct staff to initiate a code amendment to allow for electric fences as a permitted fencing material in the Industrial Zoning district; that the amendment first addresses allowing electric fences and then initiate a second phase to address other issues. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.5 Possible motion to adjourn to a Closed Door Session to review labor issues

(Closed per NRS 288.220) (Time: 4:16:48 p.m.) Mayor Martini noted that staff has indicated there is no need to adjourn to a closed session unless the Council wished to do so. He also noted that items 6.6 and 6.7 have been withdrawn from the agenda. It was suggested that staff present items 6.8 and 6.9 and then if there were questions, they could adjourn to a closed labor session. At the conclusion of the presentations, the consensus was that there was no need for a closed labor session.

6.6 Discussion, Consideration and Possible Approval of a Memorandum of Understanding with Operating Engineers Local 3 Non Supervisory Unit

WITHDRAWN FROM THE AGENDA. 6.7 Discussion, Consideration and Possible Approval of a Memorandum of

Understanding with Operating Engineers Local 3 Supervisory Unit WITHDRAWN FROM THE AGENDA.


bargaining agreement between the City of Sparks and the Operating Engineer Local 3, Non Supervisory Unit (Time: 4:17:20 p.m.)

Community Development Director Neil Krutz noted that he was the chief negotiator for Operating Engineer Local 3 (OE3) for both supervisory and non supervisory units. Mr. Krutz


Page 8 of 21

noted that the agreements were for the period July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010 and they are largely the same as the previous agreements. Highlights:

• There are no cost of living adjustments in either agreement for that period time. o This is owing to the City’s current financial condition.

• Tentative agreement was made to make adjustments to the annual leave accrual table. o Something similar was done to the Group Health Sick Leave Conversion policy

with the percentages that are converted from 20 to 25 years, depending on longevity with the City

• Proposal was made to increase the number of personal days from one per year to two per year

• Other changes are largely editorial and “clean up” in nature A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve a Memorandum of Understanding with Operating Engineers Local 3 Non Supervisory Unit for the contract period July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


bargaining agreement between the City of Sparks and the Operating Engineer Local 3, Supervisory Unit (Time: 4:21:02 p.m.)

The presentation and discussion on this item was held in conjunction with item 6.8 and is listed under that item. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve a Memorandum of Understanding with Operating Engineers Local 3 Non Supervisory Unit for the contract period July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.10 Discussion, Consideration and Possible approval of an amendment to City of

Sparks Civil Service Regulations, Article VIII, Section 5, Layoff Procedure (Time: 4:22:29 p.m.)

Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson introduced Dr. Larry Kleinworth, chairman of the Civil Service Commission and Civil Service Commissioners Mike Raney and Penny Harrison. She stated the Civil Service Regulations allow for an employee who has been laid off from the City to remain on the layoff register for up to 12 months. This allows an employee who has been laid off to come back to the job they left or apply for a similar job or other job openings they qualify for—in effect allowing the laid off employees to become the list for all open positions. At the prompting of several employees, who addressed the Commission, the Civil Service Commission requested that the layoff register be extended from 12 months to 24 months, because they felt that with the current economic situation, it was possible that people may remain unemployed for a longer period of time. Council Member Smith agreed that 24 months seemed reasonable and the right thing to do at this time.


Page 9 of 21

Council Member Schmitt asked if this item had been voted on by the Civil Service Commission and what was the vote. Dr. Kleinworth responded the vote was four to one for approval. Mr. Schmitt asked for the reasons for the dissenting vote. Dr. Kleinworth stated that Mr. Brainerd sent the Council a letter outlining his reasons for dissenting on the vote. Mr. Schmitt then asked what the advantages were to extending the list. Dr. Kleinworth stated he felt the City had a large investment in its employees through training and hiring processes and it would be a shame to loose these people that have been trained to fill a particular position. Mayor Martini said he agreed that the training was an important investment to consider. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the proposed amendment to City of Sparks Civil Service Regulations, Article VIII, Section 5, Layoff Procedure. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: 7.1 Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Approval of the FY 2009-2010

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Consortium Action Plan (Time: 4:27:02 p.m.)

Grant Administrator Tracy Wheeler noted that this plan outlines how the City will be allocating our CDBG and HOME consortium dollars to various activities throughout the City. At the time the staff report was due the City had not received notification of what our allocation would be for the next fiscal year. We received the information last week—our entitlement dollars have gone up approximately $13,000 for a total of $626,152.00. Staff also went through the prior expenditures and, in addition to the new allocation, staff is proposing to utilize a conditional $413,000 that had previously been allocated, but due to cost savings, we had not expensed. In addition, we also have a little bit of program income generated by our housing rehabilitation program and we have those dollars to re-expend. The funding is broken down as follows:

• $250,000—allocated for housing rehab • $590,000—physical improvement projects (primarily pedestrian improvements

throughout the community) Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed action plan. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the FY 2009-2010 Community Development Block Grant Action Plan to HUD as presented by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. Council asked Ms. Wheeler to provide an update at a future meeting on the program where HUD is selling “homes for a dollar.” Ms. Wheeler stated that she would be happy to do this. Council also asked about the “weatherization” program dollars. Ms. Wheeler stated HUD provided the guidelines just last week for the recovery funds and she is working with staff on applications for a number of programs. She said she will provide a follow up on the weatherization program, but


Page 10 of 21

to her knowledge there are no funds for jurisdictions or for public facilities, it is primarily for individual households. 7.2 Public Hearing, 2nd Reading and possible approval of Bill No. 2605, an

Ordinance adding an additional classification of business to Chapter 5.20 of the Sparks Municipal Code, pertaining to license fees for specific businesses and other matters properly related thereto (Time: 4:33:14 p.m.)

Purchasing Manager Dan Marran noted that in 2007/2008, in the discussions leading up to the City adopting a new garbage franchise, there was also discussion regarding allowing for competition in the market, where it makes sense. Prior to adoption of the franchise there was an unlevel playing field in the community, as the franchisee had to pay the city a franchise fee, while their competitors did not. While this condition was alleviated in the adoption of the new trash franchise, due to the change in scope, this move resulted in a reduction in franchise revenues to the City. Every time the potential loss of franchise revenues was discussed last year, it was made very clear by the Council that staff should see a remedy to recoup these lost funds where possible. In testimony, others in the trash hauling industry expressed support for paying fees, similar to the franchise fee. This bill would change the Sparks Municipal Code in order to address this issue. The addition to section 5.20 allows for the use of specialized business license fees for specific business types identified within that section. At this time the City of Sparks has a specialized formula for four different classifications of businesses: telecommunication services; warehousing; manufacturing/processing; transportation/freight; and bulk storage. Adoption of this bill would add a fifth classification: those businesses that rent and service containers for the hauling of solid waste. In short, businesses that provide a container, rental services, and the associated hauling and disposal of those materials in those containers as the primary purpose of their business would pay a business license fee equal to 5% of their gross revenues. The 5% is equal to the franchise fee currently in place in the garbage franchise. Mr. Marran noted that per NRS 237, adoption of this ordinance is defined as a rule; therefore, the City has drafted a business impact statement that is included in the staff report. The statement details the steps the City went through in drafting the ordinance and soliciting feedback from potentially affected businesses. Mr. Marran stated that if this ordinance is adopted, there is a 30 day waiting period for appeals. Effective June 12, 2009, any new applicants would be charged the new fee. Those that already have licenses in place—there is going to be some give and take from the Licensing Department on whether the fee would apply to their specific business and calculating the fee versus what they have already paid this fiscal year, and what it would be going forward. The impact on existing licensees would take place no later than October 1, 2009. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed ordinance. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Bill No. 2605 (Ordinance No. 2425) an Ordinance adding an additional classification of business to Chapter 5.20 of the Sparks Municipal Code. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Page 11 of 21

8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items: 8.1 Public Hearing, Second Reading, discussion and possible approval of

PCN09007 Bill No. 2604, an ordinance for an Annexation request, in accordance with the City of Sparks 7-year annexation program, from Stonefield Inc. for a site approximately 375 acres in size. Upon Annexation the zoning would convert from a Washoe County Designation of Tourist Commercial to a City of Sparks zoning designation of TC (Tourist Commercial) within the City of Sparks Sphere of Influence generally located in the East Truckee River Canyon north of Interstate 80 and Waltham Way approximately 6 miles east of the Sparks city limits (CONTINUED FROM 4/27/2009) (Time: 4:38:32 p.m.)

Senior Planner Jim Rundle stated this annexation request was for 375 acres in the East Truckee River Canyon, within the City of Sparks’ Sphere of Influence and identified in the City’s 7-year annexation program. He stated that this annexation request received a recommendation of denial from staff and the Sparks Planning Commission voted to uphold staff’s recommendation and voted to forward a recommendation of denial to the Sparks City Council. The reason staff recommended denial was based on the requirement to have services and facilities in place at the time of annexation, which would allow for development. He said he believed that the applicant’s request for annexation is based on the fear of discontiguous annexations being made illegal at the State Legislature this year. At the time the annexation request was submitted to Cityworks, there had been no such bill draft that we were aware of, but this doesn’t mean that a law regarding discontiguous annexations won’t be attached to some bill at some point. Mr. Rundle pointed out that in the opinion of staff, discontiguous annexations are legal in the City of Sparks. NRS 268.6255 and the fact that Sparks has an annexation program in place would allow for the discontiguous annexation because this annexation is voluntary, it does not create an island of 40 acres or less, and it is within the annexation program. The one finding this request does not meet is the facilities being in place at the time of annexation. Mr. Rundle stated that staff has outlined numerous concerns regarding this annexation request; including wild land fire and emergency response. If there were a wild land fire on this site, Station 3 would respond from Greg Street, leaving the area that Station 3 typically responds to susceptible. There is also the potential for the City having to pick up the tab for fighting a wild land fire. Police would not have a “beat” in that area, so their response would be on a reactive basis and only go out there if they were called. The annexation program anticipated that the East Truckee Canyon Area Plan would be completed, but it has not been completed at this point. Staff has a draft plan that was held up because a majority of the property owners were concerned about the proposed land use designations. At that time staff stated they were willing to consider any land use designations that would be fiscally positive for the City. Any alternative land use proposals have not been backed up by fiscal analysis that shows a positive for the City. Council Member Salerno asked if there were a fire out there now, would Sparks respond. Mr. Rundle stated that Reno would be the responder, because they merged with Washoe County. We have a mutual aid response agreement, but Truckee Meadows Fire Protection District, under the


Page 12 of 21

City of Reno, would be first responder. If this area were annexed, Station 3 would respond to the majority of the calls, whether medical or fire. Council Member Carrigan asked why this property was in our 7-year annexation program if we were not planning to annex it. He also asked how staff felt about the annexation. Community Development Director Neil Krutz explained that staff’s recommendation is to deny the annexation because they feel the request is premature: the appropriate planning documents are not in place and adopted so that we have infrastructure to serve the area; nor is there a land plan that is fiscally positive. Therefore staff feels that the planning process should be honored and the annexation should not go forward until the property planning is in place. He said the area is in our Sphere of Influence and it is our intent to ultimately consider annexation; but only once the documentation is all lined. Council Member Carrigan asked what would happen if this is not approved and then the Legislature comes out with legislation that changes the NRS to prevent noncontiguous annexations. He pointed out that there is a “wind farm” that is supposed to be annexed into the City and if noncontiguous annexations are not allowed these properties can never be in the City of Sparks because there is BLM land between these property and the current City limits. Mr. Carrigan said he has no clue what the Legislature might do and he did not want to jeopardize the future of Sparks. Mr. Krutz stated that is why staff framed the staff report with alternatives—to give the Council the option of making a policy decision to approve the annexation—in as much as there are planning processes underway, but not complete. He noted that the Council can make findings for either approval or denial. Mr. Smith stated the staff report was very thorough and there are as many reasons to approve the annexation as there are to deny it. He stressed that he had the same fears regarding what the Legislature might do and a plan has been put into place to annex this property at some point in the future. Council Member Schmitt stated that while he agreed that we were not “there” regarding the infrastructure portion of the plan for this property; he felt that in the past six years we have laid out a plan to make this part of the City of Sparks and investments have been made according to that plan. He said we want to have control over what happens and how this property is developed and he felt there was a very real possibility that the Legislature will make noncontiguous annexation illegal. He said there is a certain degree of risk in approving the annexation without the plan in place, but nothing can be built without the proper plans and we can require infrastructure to be built. Mr. Rundle confirmed that the annexation does not allow for any development to occur on the site; however, if we annex the property, it would receive a Tourist Commercial zoning designation and the property owner could develop single family residences on the property through a Special Use Permit, which would not be fiscally positive for the City. If the property is annexed without the area plan in place, the City could not require a project to be fiscally positive. We would have the ability to condition the infrastructure, but we could not condition that the project be fiscally positive for the City of Sparks. Mr. Schmitt said that because we don’t know what the Legislature will do, annexing the property now is a risk worth taking. It we don’t annex now, we may not be able to honor our commitments to the developers in the future.


Page 13 of 21

Council Member Ratti asked who pays for the mutual aid for fire assistance if we annex this area. Chief Flock explained that all the mutual agreements are a little different, but basically they all provide for a specific hourly time frame that is “free” and then any time spent fighting the fire after that specified time frame is billed to the agency that has jurisdiction in the fire area. He said we have been very successful in obtaining reimbursement on the hours that are reimbursable, but we do give a lot of “free” service, with the knowledge that we are going to receive services at some time in the future. Right now the area is not in Sparks’ fire jurisdiction, but if we annex it, it would be. Sparks would then be responsible for reimbursing other fire departments for any mutual aid above and beyond what is “free” according to the mutual aid agreement in place with that agency. Council Member Ratti also asked the Police Chief how this annexation would affect the resources of the police department. Chief Asher noted that up to 1/3 of our force could be pulled to handle any given situation in this area, if it is annexed. She then asked when the East Truckee River Canyon Plan would be complete. Mr. Rundle stated that staff has scheduled a meeting in June with all the major property owners in the East Truckee River Canyon and it is hoped that this meeting will get things moving on the plan; however, he did not feel comfortable with giving an estimate of when the plan will be finalized, because lots of elements, agencies, and property owners are involved. He said the tentative plan contained a lot of business park and single-family development, but a lot depends on the property owners and the economy. Council Member Carrigan asked the annexation could be approved, contingent upon the completion of the area plan or contingent on whether or not the Legislature chooses to make noncontiguous annexation illegal. Staff asked for a recess in order to research Mr. Carrigan’s question. The meeting was adjourned at 5:12 p.m. and reconvened at 5:16 p.m. Mr. Rundle stated that after researching Mr. Carrigan’s question, the solution would be to continue the item to the second meeting in June, when we will have a good idea what the State Legislature has decided to do. If they make this noncontiguous annexation illegal, we can consider annexation of this area. If they do not make this annexation illegal (which is probably not going to happen this legislative session), the Council could choose to deny the application based on concurrency concerns and then once the area plan is done, the applicant can come back with the annexation request and staff can recommend approval. Mr. Krutz stated this scenario would work under a number of assumptions; the key one being that if that law comes to pass, it would have an effective date of July 1 or after. The risk would be that the law is applicable upon signature. Council Member Smith asked for clarification that right now there is no development in this area that would require the police to respond. Chief Asher affirmed that there is nothing out there for them to respond to at this time. Council Member Schmitt stated that if the annexation is continued, it could affect not only this property, but other properties, such as the proposed solar farm and a possible geotech project. He said that we would like to have these projects under Sparks’ jurisdiction, rather than the County. Mr. Rundle pointed out that all these properties are in Sparks’ Sphere of Influence, so we do have a say in the development of the area, regardless of whether or not it is annexed into


Page 14 of 21

the City. Mr. Schmitt said we might have a say in what is built, but the property taxes go to the County. In response to further questions from Council, Mr. Rundle stated that the property owner for the solar farm did submit an annexation request to the City; however, the annexation application did not include a fiscal analysis, which is one of the requirements for an annexation application. The fiscal analysis does not have to be fiscally positive, but they do have to submit one. The applicant was informed that they needed to submit a fiscal analysis, but it has not yet been submitted. Mayor Martini invited the applicant to make a presentation to the Council. Ms. Cynthia Albright of Stantec Consulting, representing the applicant, introduced Gary Nelson of Stonefield, Inc. and Nick Pavich. Ms. Albright noted that they are aware of the consideration requirements for this application; however, these are very unusual circumstances and that this was a discretionary application which they felt deserved special consideration. There are some individuals within the State government who wished to enact legislation to eradicate future discontiguous applications at the local level. Our fear is that this legislation will be quietly tacked onto the bottom of another piece of legislation and get quietly slipped through without notice. If that happens, the $3 million that her clients have already expended to this point on this property will be voided. Ms. Albright stated that this property and other to the east provide the key parcels for future eastward expansion and growth in the City of Sparks. Ms. Albright stated that because the applicant is not asking for an intensification of land use with this annexation, they felt they were in compliance with the Truckee Meadows Regional Plan policies that relate to concurrency. She emphasized that they did submit a fiscal analysis in conjunction with this annexation request and it does show that there is a cumulative surplus of over $3.1 million to the City of Sparks between the 2010 and 2019 ten year planning period just for the development of the 375 acres that is the subject of the annexation. She went on to say that the fiscal impact report was based on all of the property being designated as tourist commercial with the types of uses that would support a truck stop. This would increase the income stream to the City, particularly if other properties were also annexed into the City. Ms. Albright stated that they are aware of the potential costs of public safety; however, she felt that those costs would be offset by the benefits of the property taxes that the City would receive in the future. Ms. Albright noted that the property owners have diligently working with the City for more than 8 years on the land planning process and also to secure the right to construct and pay for a new interchange (at the City’s direction) at Waltham Way to provide access to the area from the freeway. She emphasized that the property is included in the City of Sparks’ Seven Year Annexation Program and it does meet the requirements of NRS 286.6255 (with the exception of provision of services at the time of annexation). Because of the timing and because there are no entitlements for the development of the property, concerns regarding the provision of services at the time of annexation are not outweighed by the risk of not annexing the property at this time. She stated the City had considered all the NRS requirements when the property was include dint the annexation plan and the goal of having an adopted area plan is, in fact, a goal and not a requirement or force of law. She stated that special circumstances arise and consideration should


Page 15 of 21

be given when they do arise. They believe this application is one of those special circumstances. She emphasized that Sparks has already completed the City of Sparks’ TMSA/FSA conceptual facility master plan; it was endorsed by the Regional Water Planning Commission; and it could be adopted by the City of Sparks within a matter of months, following adoption of the East Truckee Canyon Area Plan. Depending on the way the land use plan actually gets revised, it could require some minor improvements or modifications to the facility plan. She said the owners are working with City staff to revise the area plan and they have even submitted a very preliminary fiscal impact report. The owners are aware that annexation does not mean development, but they have diligently worked with staff to come up with a plan that the City of Sparks can embrace and they are asking for annexation at this time. Council Member Ratti asked if any of the $3+ million that the applicants have spent so far on the property would be of value if this property were not annexed into the City, but instead developed in the County. Ms. Albright said certainly the expenditures on the Federal Highway Administration for the interchange ($1.5 million) would not go to waste. However, the resources spent for the land planning and City of Sparks’ processes and requirements would be a loss. A brief discussion ensued regarding whether or not the property could be developed under Washoe County rules and regulations. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed annexation. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. Council Member Schmitt stated he supported this annexation because in 2003 we encouraged the developer to go ahead with the expenses to start developing out there. It is unfortunate that we have to go this route to protect that area. However; he is going to be very critical of all the projects that come forward because he does not want a repeat of the warehousing district along the Truckee River that the City got stuck with in the early 50’s. The projects proposed should be very high quality projects; ones the City can be proud of; ones that produce jobs. Council Member Ratti said she is not supporting the annexation because there is a process and we should follow that process. The process includes finding of fact and our staff and the Planning Commission could not make a finding of fact and she did not hear any testimony today that changed that finding of fact, which would be the concurrent provision of services at the moment of annexation. Mayor Martini said he is in favor of the annexation because we need to get this done.

A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve Bill No. 2605 (Ordinance No. 2424), an annexation request associated with PCN09007, to annex 375 acres into the City of Sparks, based on findings A1 through A4 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, NO. Motion carried. (Time: 5:45:45 p.m.) Council Member Carrigan read a disclosure statement as follows:


Page 16 of 21

I am required to make the following disclosure under NRS 281A.420(4): Carlos Vasquez is a friend of mine and has volunteered on each of my campaigns for City Council. Mr. Vasquez was at one time a paid representative for Red Hawk Land Company on this project, but he is no longer professionally affiliated with this project. The Nevada Commission on Ethics has determined that this relationship amounts to a commitment in a private capacity warranting disclosure and has further concluded that under the requirement of NRS 281A.420(2), I must abstain from voting on Item. 8.2. on tonight’s agenda. The City Attorney’s Office has advised me that the Opinion of the Commission on Ethics is binding and that I am required to abstain from voting on this issue. I am hereby filing a written legal opinion from the City Attorney with the City Clerk. I also want to apologize to my constituency. Because of this statute, they will have no representation tonight on this issue. I want to put it on the record that I do not agree with the Ethics Commissions’ opinion and advisement on this issue. (Time: 5:47:08 p.m.) Council Member Salerno read a disclosure statement as follows: I am required to make the following disclosure under NRS 281A.420(4): My company, Nevada Forms and Printing, does business with the Sparks Nugget on a bid/buy basis. The Nevada Commission on Ethics has determined that this relationship amounts to a commitment in a private capacity warranting disclosure and has further concluded that under the requirement of NRS 281A.420(2), I must abstain from voting on Item 8.2. on tonight’s agenda. The City Attorney’s Office has advised me that the Opinion of the Commission on Ethics is binding and that I am required to abstain from voting on this issue. I am hereby filing a written legal opinion from the City Attorney with the City Clerk. Agency Attorney Adams stated that based on the respective reasons obligating the abstention by Council Members Carrigan and Salerno, as enumerated in their disclosure, the total membership of the Sparks City Council is reduced to three, as a matter of law, under NRS 281A.420(5). This reduction conforms to the requirements of NRS 241.0355(2) and the written legal opinions which has been provided by this office and relied upon by Council Members Carrigan and Salerno. These documents have been filed with the City Clerk and will be included in the record of today’s proceedings. Accordingly, and affirmative vote of two members of the City Council is required for a proposed measure to pass, related to the remaining agenda item 8.2.

The City Council declared a recess at 5:45 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 6:30 p.m. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items: (CONTINUED FROM

3:00 P.M. SESSION) (Time: 6:30:31 p.m.) Mayor Martini noted the Council Members Salerno and Carrigan are recusing themselves and are abstaining from the vote on this item. (Time: 6:32:04 p.m.) Pastor Barb West from the Sparks Nazarene Church led the audience in prayer.


Page 17 of 21

8.2 Public Hearing, Discussion and Possible action concerning City Council review pursuant to Mayor’s request and an Applicant Appeal of Planning Commission decision regarding PCN09005, a Proposed Master Plan Amendment request seeking:

A.) To change the land use designation from General Commercial (GC) to Tourist Commercial (TC) on a site approximately 20.5 acres in size generally located east of Pyramid Highway, north of the Lazy 5 park within the Tierra Del Sol Planned Development, Sparks, NV; and

B.) To change the land use designation from Tourist Commercial (TC) to 5 du/ac (dwelling units per acre), on a site approximately 27 acres in size generally located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Vista Boulevard and Wingfield Hills Road in the Wingfield Springs Planned Development, Sparks, NV (Time: 6:32:04 p.m.)

Senior Planner Tim Thompson noted that this was an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision regarding PCN09005—a proposed Master Plan Amendment request seeking to change the land use designations on two parcels. He reviewed the history of the request, stating that on April 2, 2009, the proposed Master Plan Amendments associated with this case failed to achieve the requisite 2/3 majority vote before the Sparks Planning Commission—a motion to approve the item failed for lack of a second. Certain Planning Commissioners believed that the development project proposed on the parcels of land which would be affected by the proposed Master Plan Amendments would cause unintended impacts on adjacent properties and that the proposed land use is not compatible with the existing surrounding land uses. During the April 13, 2009, City Council Meeting Mayor Martini verbally requested that the Sparks City Council review the decision of the Sparks Planning Commission. On April 1, 2009, the Red Hawk Land Company filed an appeal requesting that the City Council overturn the April 2, 2009, decision of the Sparks Planning Commission regarding the proposed Master Plan Amendments. Mr. Harvey Whittemore, the Manager of the Red Hawk Land Company, presented his appeal, stating he felt that the original development agreement between Red hawk and the City is a recorded contract and they simply want to be able to receive the benefits that were negotiated in that contract. He said this application is about the sanctity of the negotiated contract and sound planning principles—not about the impact of competition on a downtown business owner. Mr. Whittemore then reviewed the legal principles on which he is basing his appeal. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed master plan amendment. He cautioned those that wished to speak that this is a business matter and that personal comments regarding the appellant, council members, the City Attorney, or their families would not be tolerated. The following individuals spoke in opposition to the Master Plan Amendment: Vija Cox Tom Stauss Bryce Alstead Michonne Ascuaga Stephen Peek Roy Adams Herman Stewart Edis Hill Gary Schmidt John K. Bradbury Adam McMillen Shirley Bertschinger


Page 18 of 21

The following individuals did not wish to speak, but were present to express their opposition to the Master Plan Amendment: Rendell L. Banks Linda Banks Mari Nigro Windee Foote Alma Martin Beth Lau Darryl West Michele Salonek Heidi Gerhardt Dusty Capurro Marlene Raviliuws W.E. Walters Nettie Hansen Delice Aeoster Brice Alstead Jeannie Adams Penny Jones Stephanie King Tara Hill Pete Seaman Mureal Hogan Keyanna McMillen Beau Connolly Lori Teaklee Dawn C. Hammond Rita S. Kahl Giles M. Marion Nancy Trabert Terry Maine Staci Harold Don D. Harold Brian Maine Sandra Mindeguia Sau Esquivel Cindy Rife Barry Rife Shannon Waldrop Kylee Maine Lindsey Maine Patricia McDowell Kevin Schmidt Danny R. Waldrop Sarah Mosier-Gallagher David Maher Chris Pasieka John E. Bower Christine Gray Steve Henderson Isis Vann P. Sue Henderson Ryan Gallagher Debbie Trombetta Adam Bass Linda Beldon Doug Kuehn Mariela M. Sozo Kelly Lewis James Southand Donna Green Ernie Borba Carrol Guzman Tracy Holland Bob Bertschinger Tony Delise Cindy Hall James Lackie Jenne Clark Dunning Lau Jean marshall Adriana Neri Malik Tariq Batool Tariq Ryan kass Nyls Nymaa Glen M. Hall Jon Snyder Lynette D. Halsey Robin Vieas Kim Johnson Jerad Mattingly Shaun Anderson Karl Rodriguez Pamela & Brad Culbertson T. Krembs Michael Pate The following individuals spoke in support of the Master Plan Amendment: Drew Canavero William Brainard Lou Dauria Scott Whittemore Garrich Gordon/Louis&Rocha The following individuals did not wish to speak, but were present to express their support of the Master Plan Amendment: Jenny Wilson Roxanne Doyle Carri Kihne Beth Wilson Katie Wilson Tom Steinberg Naalie Okeson Jim Harris Renee Harris Carl Savely Tim Gonyo Michelle Stewart Trevor Puryear There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed.


Page 19 of 21

Mayor Martini called a recess at 7:44 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 7:48 p.m. City Attorney Adams pointed out that the City has a responsibility to make the appropriate Master Plan Amendment findings as required by Nevada Law. In this case the Council the council has to make specific findings and he asked the Council to disregard the “settlement agreement” the City made with Red Hawk Land Company and look at the specific finding when considering whether or not to uphold the Planning Commission’s denial of this Master Plan Amendment. He noted that our ordinances allow the Council to either affirm, modify, remand for further consideration, or reverse the action or decision [of the Planning Commission]. If the Council is going to modify or reverse that decision, they need to make specific findings and not be swayed, intimidated, or otherwise influenced by the issue that is before the Nevada Supreme Court. Council Member Ratti stated she would prefer to remand this application back to the Planning Commission for more specificity on their findings before making a decision on this complex issue. She said the findings of fact are important to her and if we don’t make the findings of fact, then we have to decide whether or not this application, regardless of the settlement agreement, is in conformance with the master plan. She stated that she believed the current policy of the City of Sparks, as voted upon by the City Council, is that tourist commercial should be located on the I-80 corridor. Whether we did that because of surveys, citizen petition, or an adhoc gaming group, the master plan, as it is currently written, supports gaming along the I-80 corridor. The question before us is does this particular applicant have an exception to that current master plan standard because they locked in the language in a prior master plan agreement (Sphere of Influence agreement). Then she has to decide whether she holds the applicant to the current standards or does she hold them to the standard of the prior sphere of influence language. Council Member Schmitt asked if the findings of facts are in the staff report. Mr. Thompson confirmed that all four findings of fact for approval of the Master Plan Amendments are listed in the staff report. Mr. Schmitt noted that when the decision was made to limit tourist commercial development to the I-80 corridor area, it was made very clear that this decision did not involve this property, because of the application already in process at that time. He also asked for clarification on remanding this application back to the Planning Commission a second time, stating his understanding was that if the Planning Commission denied the Master Plan Amendment requests again, there is no appeal of that second denial. City Attorney Adams clarified if this were remanded back to Planning Commission, they would take a look at the application, anew, and if they chose to deny it again, then it is the appellants right to appeal it back to the City Council, again. Council Member Schmitt said he did not feel that the Planning Commission did their job—they made no findings of fact upon which their denial was based. Council Member Schmitt stated the most articulate testimony tonight was the prayer by Pastor Barb West. Her prayer was that when this council makes a decision, that the community accepts the decision and moves forward. Mr. Schmitt said we would not be here tonight if the City Council was listened to when we made the settlement agreement and something tells me that we are probably not going to be listened to tonight—not everybody is going to accept the decision of the Council and the fight of the “big dogs” will continue. Mr. Schmitt also made it clear that the


Page 20 of 21

success or failure of businesses is not something the City Council can base their decision upon. We have no legal status as a City Council to deny a project based upon vacant store fronts. That is not in the NRS and the law does not allow us to do that—those are business decisions. Mayor Martini commented that, as he recalled, the intent of the Council was to pull this piece of property out of the I-80/TC (Tourist Commercial) corridor restrictions. He also thought that the Council reserved the right to put TC in other areas (besides the I-80 Corridor) if they saw fit. Mr. Krutz confirmed that this intent is reflected in the language that the council adopted regarding the restrictions on TC development. Mayor Martini said it comes down to the City Attorney’s advice—our attorney has never, ever, waivered on what his instructions were to us and what he thought was right. He said we had a contract with the land development company and that we should honor that contract. Mayor Martini also said that he felt that the planning professionals employed by the City made the proper findings for approval that the Planning Commission ignored. Council Member Ratti said she read the minutes of all the meetings involved in this issue and she did not find anything that pulled this particular piece of land out of that policy decision. However it did say that the Council retains the right to make Master Plan changes that would change that policy in the future; however we maintain the right to do this any time we make a Master Plan update. Council Member Schmitt asked staff to review the meeting minutes and find where the Council specifically excluded this parcel from the TC/I-80 restrictions. City Attorney Adams stated that irrespective of what the minutes might show on this issue, the Sparks City Charter gives the City Council the ultimate authority concerning zoning (Section 2.090(5)(11). Council Member Smith made a motion to approve the Master Plan Amendment and remand it back to the Planning Commission for a report. Council Member Schmitt seconded the motion for discussion. Council Member Ratti said that as she sees it, her role is to decide whether or not she agrees with the findings of fact. She said she is thankful for all the people that turned out and said that has been a tough process. The Whittemore family does excellent work and the quality of the project has never been in question and if the casino is built, it will be a high quality project. However, she spent a lot of time researching this issue and she cannot support this project. Her decision is based on whether or not the applicant has an entitlement based on a 1994 development agreement that is transferrable. While the City entered into a settlement agreement that stipulated to the facts of the agreement, we don’t have the court’s opinion that this is actually valid, and therefore, she can’t support approval of this project. Council Member Schmitt asked for clarification of motion. City Attorney Adams stated the council is moving to approve the Master Plan Amendment and asking the Planning Commission to provide the Council with a report outlining the ramifications or outfall of the decision made tonight, but not necessarily justifying their decision. If they don’t give the Council a report, under Nevada law, within 40 days, it is deemed that they have accepted the City Council’s


Page 21 of 21

decision and the Council is free to reconsider the matter and certify it to the Regional Planning Commission. Council asked how a negative decision from the courts regarding the settlement agreement would affect a vote to approve this Master Plan Amendment. City Attorney Adams that due to the confusing nature of the court issues, he advised the Council not to consider the settlement agreement when making their decision regarding this Master Plan Amendment request. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the Master Plan Amendment associated with PCN09005, adopting findings MP1 through MP4 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report and direct the City of Sparks Planning Commission to prepare a report on the Master Plan Amendment associated with PCN090005 and file that report with the City Council within 40 days pursuant to NRS 278.220(4) with the reasons for denying the Master Plan Amendment. Council Members Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, NO. Council Members Carrigan, Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried. 9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 8:18:49 p.m.) None.

10. Adjournment (Time: 8:18:56 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:18 p.m. _______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________ City Clerk >>>

Page 1 of 3

MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING 9:00 A.M., Tuesday, May 19, 2009

City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 9:01:17 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 9:00 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 9:01:24 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti (via telephone), Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt (via telephone), City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. *Comments from the Public (Time: 9:04:42 p.m.) None. 3. Presentation, discussion and possible direction or approval of Federal, State,

Nevada League of Cities and Local Legislative Affairs issues (Time: 9:01:50 p.m.) Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll noted he provided the Council with a packet of information and he wanted the Council to know that this Friday is a self-imposed deadline for the Speaker and Majority Leader of the Senate. They are hoping to have the budget and any bill concerning money—particularly any increases in fees or taxes—to the Governor’s office by Friday—Saturday at the latest. The five day clock will then start and the Governor will have to respond (one way or another) by Friday, the 29th, which will allow the elected body to override any vetoes. Mr. Driscoll noted that things are moving rapidly in the Legislature and staff is attempting to keep on top of the issues and monitoring bills that have the potential to take money from local government. Council Member Salerno asked about the proposed STAR Bond legislation. Mr. Driscoll stated that the bill is being considered in the Senate. As it stands, our project is exempted out of the new legislation and it deals with future projects only. The only thing we will be asked to do deals with sales tax reporting. 4. Public hearing as required by NRS 354.596 to allow public comment on the

Tentative Budget of the City of Sparks for fiscal year 2009-2010 (Time: 9:06:04 p.m.)

Finance Director Tom Minton noted that this item requires the City Council to open a public hearing and take comment on the proposed tentative budget filed with the City Clerk. Council Member Carrigan asked if the budget was in a different format this year because it was very easy to read. Mr. Minton stated that staff put together some schedules to make it easier to read, but the State required format did not change.

Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting for May 19, 2009

Page 2 of 3

Council Member Carrigan asked what the total was for our outstanding bonds. Mr. Minton stated that the bonds are listed in different funds, but the total was approximately $220 million, with STAR Bonds being about half of that total. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the tentative budget for the City of Sparks. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. 5. Consideration and possible adoption of the Final Budget for the City of Sparks for

fiscal year 2009-2010. (Time: 9:10:26 p.m.) Finance Director stated that the budget as presented is unchanged from the tentative budget presented to the Council on April 27th. It still envisions and General Fund ending fund balance of $4.87% of total expenditures and includes the concessions from the labor groups. He emphasized that the budget does not include the effect of any pending legislation. Therefore, depending on what the Legislature finally winds up doing, we may have to file an amended budget by August 15th. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to adopt the Final Budget for the City of Sparks, as presented, for fiscal year 2009-2010. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 6. Discussion, Consideration and Possible Approval of a Memorandum of

Understanding with Operating Engineers Local 3 Non Supervisory Unit (Time: 9:12:36 p.m.)

Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson noted that Items 6 and 7 are from the Operating Engineers Local 3, supervisory and nonsupervisory units. She said the City Manager met with union representatives and requested they consider a 4.25% pay concession for FY 2009/2010. Through negotiations, staff was able to come to anagreement where city employees (covered under this agreement) will take five furlough days for the first half of the fiscal year and, if needed, six furlough days in the second half of the fiscal year in order to meet the 4.25% concession. Council Member Smith thanked the union for stepping up to the plate and assisting in meeting our budget shortfall. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve a Memorandum of Understanding for July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010 Agreement between the City of Sparks and the Operating Engineers Local 3 Non Supervisory Unit. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 7. Discussion, Consideration and Possible Approval of a Memorandum of

Understanding with Operating Engineers Local 3 Supervisory Unit (Time: 9:14:46 p.m.)

Discussion for this item is listed under Item 6. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve a Memorandum of Understanding for July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010 Agreement

Page 3 of 3

between the City of Sparks and the Operating Engineers Local 3 Supervisory Unit. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 8. Comments: 8.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 9:15:39 p.m.) City Manager thanked the Department Heads for their hard work in preparing the budget for this year. He also thanked all employees for their wage concessions and Finance Department staff for their many hours in putting together the budget document. 9. *Adjournment (Time: 9:16:16 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:16 p.m. _______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________ City Clerk >>>

Page 1 of 9

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 3:00 P.M. Tuesday, May 26, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:01:37 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:00 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:01:41 p.m.) Mayor Pro tempore Ron Schmitt, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, Acting City Manager Steve Driscoll, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Mayor Geno Martini, City Manager Shaun Carey, ABSENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:02:07 p.m.) The invocation was given by Dr. Tom Butler from the Sparks United Methodist Church. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:03:05 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Phillip Salerno. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:03:28 p.m.) Mr. Ronald McGee thanked city staff for their fast response to his request for cross walks to be striped in the Marina area; the Police Department for working with him on his police report; and Mr. Tarburton for keeping the Washoe County Senior Center in Sparks open. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:05:27 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: 3.1 Regular Meeting of May 11, 2009 (Time: 3:05:56 p.m.) Mayor Pro tem Schmitt noted that the minutes to be approved are for April 27, 2009, not for May 11, 2009, as listed on the agenda. The City Attorney has ruled that since the staff report and minutes in the agenda packet were for the 27th, the minutes can be approved. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 27, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Presentation – An overview of the property assessment process (Time: 3:06:35 p.m.)


Page 2 of 9

Mr. Josh Wilson, the Washoe County Assessor, provided a review of the assessment process, including: how often property is assessed; how property value is determined; and how the current housing market is affecting the property values. In response to questions from Council, Mr. Wilson explained the abatement process: 2004 is the base year for the property tax cap legislation and until such time as property tax assessments are reverted back to 2004 values, a homeowner may not see a decrease in his tax bill. Having said that, a majority of Wingfield Springs and Spanish Springs homes were put on the tax roll after 2004, so those properties will see a reduction in their tax bill next year. The older properties will have a higher abatement than the newer properties. As the market corrects itself, abatements become less and less of a factor because we are getting back to where the assessed value times the tax rate is less than 3% greater than last year’s tax bill. He discussed a market based value system versus resetting depreciation and the appeal process with regard to property taxes. 5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:29:35 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.7. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


transfers for the period April 23, 2009, through May 6, 2009 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.

5.2 Consideration and possible award of the Informal Quote, for the 2008/2009

Police Department Access Improvement Project, CIP 9037 to Northern Nevada Concrete, in the amount of $69,323.80

An agenda item Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending the City Council award a quote for the Police Department Access Improvement Project to Northern Nevada Concrete. This project will replace the deteriorated stairs and railing used to access the building from the Prater Way/RTC bus stop with an accessible ramp. Six informal quotes were received, with Northern Nevada Concrete being the lowest quote. Funds are available for this project.

5.3 Consideration and possible acceptance of the donation of two vehicles and electronic tracking equipment to the Sparks Police Department from the National Insurance Crime Bureau

An agenda item Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council accept a donation from the National Insurance Crime Bureau as part of their BAIT program designed to reduce insurance costs related to stolen vehicles. While the City has possession of the vehicles and equipment, they will be titled to the City and covered under the City’s self-insurance program. The vehicles will be returned to the insurance company in 2012. There is no financial impact for this donation.

5.4 Consideration and possible approval of a contract for seasonal maintenance

of the Sparks Marina channel and lake with Aquatic Environments, Inc. in the amount of not to exceed $39,989


Page 3 of 9

An agenda item Civil Engineer John Martini recommending the City Council approve a contract for seasonal maintenance of the Sparks Marina channel and shallow shoreline areas of the lake. Aquatic Environments Inc. (AEI) has been providing these services since 2005 (paid by the developer David Dahl) and has created a program that is specific to the Sparks Marina. The program includes weekly maintenance and monitoring of the channel; algae control; and aquatic plant control from May through December of 2009. Funds have been budgeted for this yearly expense.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of the 2009 Alley Rehabilitation

Program to Black Rock Construction Inc., in the amount of $34,580 An agenda item Transportation Manager Jon Erickson recommending the City Council award the 2009 Alley Rehabilitation contract Black Rock Construction Inc. The program includes the removal and replacement of deteriorated asphalt pavements at the selected sites. Four quotes were received for this project, with Black Rock Construction being the lowest. Funds are budgeted for this project.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval of the repair and purchase of the

upgrade hydraulic systems on Vehicles 512C and 514C from Certified Power, Inc. Companies in the amount of $30,942.90

An agenda item Equipment Superintendent Ron Korman recommending the City Council approve the hydraulic system repairs/upgrades as outlined in the staff report. The Certified Power system will extend the life of these plow trucks and facilitate the removal of snow. Funds are available for this purchase. 5.7 Consideration and possible approval of an Interlocal Cooperative Agreement

with the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) of Washoe County for the reimbursement to the RTC in the amount not to exceed $350,000 for an additional 3.4 million square feet of slurry seal on their contract for the 2009 Preventive Maintenance, Slurry Seal Program

An agenda item Transportation Manager Jon Erickson recommending the City Council approve an interlocal agreement for the 2009 Slurry Seal Program. By bidding with RTC for the application of this maintenance treatment, the City is able to cover additional streets, due to favorable bids. Fund are budgeted for this expense. 6. General Business:

6.1 Applicant interviews for Civil Service Commission, Reno-Tahoe Airport

Authority Board of Trustees, Sparks Park & Recreation Commission (Time: 3:30:04 p.m.)

Mayor Pro tem Schmitt noted that Mayor Martini was not present for the interviews because he was being inducted into the Sparks High School Hall of Fame in a ceremony being held at Sparks High School this afternoon. The following applicants were present and were interviewed by the Council for the board or commission for which they applied: Reno-Tahoe Airport Authority Board of Trustees: • William Eck • Don Mackey


Page 4 of 9

• Mike Curdock • Roy Pete Vossler • Ken Pender Civil Service Commission: • Steve Burlie • Nicole Contreras • Lou Dauria • Gary Hipple • Ron Oldham Parks and Recreation Commission: • Richard “Scott” Allen • Tom Cornell • Angela Fuss • Daniel Kovach • Roy O’Connell • Deborah Wells Mayor Pro tem Schmitt announced that the decision for who would be appointed would be announced at the June 8, 2009, City Council Meeting. Council also encouraged the applicants to consider becoming a part of the Citizens Advisory Committee.

6.2 Consideration and possible acceptance of a grant from E. L. Cord

Foundation, in the amount of $15,000.00, for the purchase of Coplogic Desk Officer Online Reporting Software (Time: 4:23:05 p.m.)

Police Chief Steve Asher stated this is an on-line reporting system that is web based. He said they have made several applications for grants in an effort to keep up with technology and the E.L. Cord Foundation has contributed $15,000 towards this project. They are waiting to hear from other foundations for additional funds for this project. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to accept a grant from E. L. Cord Foundation, in the amount of $15,000.00. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.3 Consideration and Possible Approval of donations for Partners in Parks and

Recreation from the Nevada Amateur Softball Association ($1,000.00) and the Sertoma Club of Sparks ($1,000.00) (Time: 4:24:27 p.m.)

Parks and Recreation Director Stan Sherer noted that the Partners in Parks and Recreation was established in 2008 with the goal of soliciting input and support from the community to try and bridge the gap between the demand for services and the existing resources. Today we have two organizations which have partnered with us to keep the Junior Giants program viable. This was one of the programs that received budget cuts this past year. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve the donations as outlined. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Page 5 of 9


Government Affairs Analyst Kathy Clewett noted that the Legislature should end by next Monday. They are scheduling conference committees—this is what happens when a bill passes one side and is passed to the other house, where it is amended. The amended bill then has to go back to the first house to a conference committee. AB80 – the sewer lateral bill. This was sent to the Governor for signature on May 22nd. The bill will give all the cities two years to figure out a fee structure to collect for marking sewer laterals. AB119 – the comprehensive regional plan and sustainability of water resources bill. The governor vetoed the bill on the 25th. However, to make sure that part of the language made it into law, the language has now been attached to SB175—the flood control bill. SB175 is going through a conference committee. AB147 – bidding preferences for local companies. This was sent to the Governor on May 23rd. The City will now be required to have local preferences for bids. The general estimate from our Purchasing Department is that it is going to cost the City 5% to 7% more for some items. The definition of local in this bill was Nevada, so someone from Truckee would not be considered local. AB422 – the STAR Bonds bill. This will be heard tomorrow at 1:30 in Senate Government Affairs. AB458 – Redevelopment funding bill. This was sent to the Governor, but we have not heard whether he is going to veto or sign it. AB494 – this is one of the studies that the Legislature is still contemplating. AB543 – taking 4 cents from every hundred dollars of property valuation from Washoe and Clark counties. This was sent to the Governor on May 22nd. AB552 – raising the administrative collection fee from local governments from .75% to 1.75%. This was sent to the Governor on May 22nd. SB175 – the flood control bill. This is sitting in the Senate and it has not been assigned to a committee. This bill has the same language as AB119. SB201 – the Washoe County RTC 5 bill. The Governor vetoed this on May 21st and it is has not been sent back to the Legislature. SB213 – Sparks’ Charter bill. This was sailing along fine—it had been passed out of the Assembly Government Affairs Committee and it was on the floor. The bill was amended on the 23rd to add language from the ward election bill. Sparks had been amended out of the ward election bill, but now that language has been put into the Sparks Charter bill. The bill has passed out of the Assembly side and it has gone over to the Senate side. It has to go through conference


Page 6 of 9

committee, but that committee has not been posted yet, so we don’t know who is going to be assigned to that committee to discuss this change in our Charter bill. SB264 – another local government authority interim study. This is still sitting in the Senate and the plan is to file all the studies together. SB294 – another interim study that is just sitting. SB311 – the fluoridation of water in Washoe County. This will be heard tomorrow at 1:30 in the Assembly Health and Human Services Committee. SB433 – the bill that will provide the State with the opportunity to allow their workers to go on furloughs. This bill was heard, vetoed, discussed and voted out on the same day. There is some confusion in the language regarding whether local governments were included in this and the part that is included is that PERS and health benefits still accrue while the person is on furlough. The LCB has said that the intent was that it would apply to local governments. The bill has gone to the Governor and we are just looking for clarification on whether it applies to us and how much it is going to cost the City. Council asked for clarification on the sewer laterals bill. Ms. Clewett stated the Legislature wanted to start enforcing the fact that cities had to start marking the sewer laterals and that we were going to have to pay for it. We said that was great onerous on the cities. Ms. Clewett said that Sr. Assistant City Attorney Shirle Eiting was involved in the discussions on this, but it was her understanding that it was amended because the original intent was to make it effective July 1st, but there was no way the cities could implement this in such a short time frame. The amendment gives us two years to figure out what this is going to cost us and what we can charge the rate payers for this service. Council Member Carrigan expressed his frustration with the Legislature in general and with the Sparks Charter bill in particular.

6.5 Presentation, discussion and possible direction or approval of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) program (Time: 4:44:26 p.m.)

City Engineer Pete Etchart noted that staff is getting our application ready for the EECBG program. At the request of the City Manager, he reviewed several proposed items in the grant application and noted that at the next Council Meeting he would be asking for final approval of the grant application. Mr. Etchart noted that we expect to receive a direct allocation of $840,000. There is also $400 million available in national EECBG competitive grant applications and Sparks will also be applying for those funds. This program will be administered in a similar fashion to the current CDBG program. Mr. Etchart explained that an energy efficiency and conservation strategy is required by all agencies that are receiving a direct allocation of funds. The strategy has to have measurable goals and objectives (basically energy savings and emissions reductions); requires a schedule for


Page 7 of 9

major milestones; requires an implementation plan (which includes coordination with State and other local agencies); the benefits of the implementation plan and transparency requirements. Mr. Etchart then outlined the time frame for the application and discussed the focus of our energy saving efforts.

6.6 Consideration and Possible Approval of the FY 2008-2009 Community

Development Block Grant (CDBG) Action Plan Amendment to incorporate the CDBG American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding (Time: 4:57:00 p.m.)

City Planner Armando Ornelas noted that this amendment addresses $166,633 in additional funding allocated to Sparks through the ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) of 2009. The proposed use of the additional funding is for a pedestrian improvement project within a low-income neighborhood—removing and replacing concrete curb, gutter and sidewalks and installing ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) compliant accessibility ramps, driveway approaches and catch basins on Zephyr Way between 16th and 18th Streets. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve an amendment to the FY 2008-2009 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Action Plan. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.7 Consideration and possible direction on FY 2009-10 expenditures for

community events, sponsorships, and memberships (Time: 4:58:56 p.m.) Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll noted this staff report outlines the budget consequences of events that have taken place and we now need to discuss funding for next fiscal year. He noted that a spread sheet had been provided in the staff report for Council’s consideration. Council Member Carrigan asked for clarification on the Alliance for Innovation. Mr. Driscoll noted this used to be called the Innovations Group. They are a think tank that works with Arizona State University and the International City Manager’s Association. They produce best practices; they hold conferences; and provide documents on a regular basis that demonstrate best practices. The City has participated and been recognized for several practices in the past. This gives us an opportunity to see what other communities are doing and saves us from having to go to conferences to get the same information. Council Member Carrigan asked if the recommended funding for the Nevada League of Cities ($2,300) included a 20% reduction membership cost from previous years. Mr. Schmitt stated that he did not believe it did; however the League voted to reduce their membership costs by 20%, so this $2,300 should be lower by 20%. Mr. Schmitt said he asked for a 50% reduction, but the board voted only 20%. He stated his intent was to apply the savings toward travel for the Council to attend the National League of Cities conference. Council Member Salerno suggested that we cancel our membership in the National League of Cities until the economy is better because we can’t afford to send representatives to the conferences. Mr. Schmitt said he asked for a 50% reduction in membership fees from the Nevada League of Cities, but the board voted only 20%. He stated his intent was to apply the savings toward travel for the Council to attend the National League of Cities conference.


Page 8 of 9

Council Member Ratti asked about the funding for the Keep Truckee Meadows Beautiful non-profit organization—did this support our participation in the free dump day? Mr. Driscoll stated that this is the sponsorship money to hold park clean up days and free dump day and also provides seed money to get the community out to clean up events. Council Member Schmitt noted that we just approved funding for EDAWN. He asked if that approval was for 08/09 funding or for 09/10 funding. Mr. Driscoll stated the approval was for the next budget cycle (09/10), to make sure funds were budgeted. Council Member Schmitt said for the most part these memberships are a small amount of money and he is in favor of maintaining membership; however, he was not in favor of the Keep Truckee Meadows Beautiful because he was not sure what benefits we were getting and because this was a non-profit organization and they need to go through the procedures set up for non-profits to request funding from the City. Mr. Schmitt also requested that the funding for EDAWN, if it is for next year, come back to the Council. He asked that the payment for the Nevada League of Cities and the National League of Cities be placed on the agenda for approval when it is due, instead of approving it now. Council Member Salerno noted we are paying almost $1,800 for the Reno/Sparks Chamber of Commerce and we are paying $825 for Sparks Chamber of Commerce and he asked what benefits we receive by being a member of the Reno/Sparks Chamber of Commerce. Council Member Ratti clarified that she is not against Keep Truckee Meadows Beautiful, but she felt uninformed regarding what work they are doing in the community. Council Member Salerno suggested that each organization be requested to provide a presentation on what they are doing that benefits the City. Mayor Pro tem Schmitt said this is not taking funding off the list, but an opportunity for organizations to provide information at the time the money is requested and also allows time for us to see how the City is doing financially. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve funding for the Alliance for Innovation; employee awards luncheon; ICMA Comparative Performance Measurement and bring the other memberships back when the membership payments are due. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. Mayor Pro tem Schmitt said it has come to his attention that funds for some organizations are going through department budgets. He asked staff to tabulate what is going through the various departments for non-profits, stating the Tourism and Marketing Board is trying to get a handle on where all the different funds are coming from for tourism and marketing related items. 7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: (Time:

5:15:50 p.m.) None.


Page 9 of 9

8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items: (Time: 5:15:56 p.m.) None.

9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 5:16:01 p.m.) Council Member Ratti congratulated Mayor Martini and form Council Member John Mayer for their induction into the Sparks High School Hall of Fame.


Page 1 of 10

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 3:00 P.M. Monday, June 8, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:01:36 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:04 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:01:45 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:01:56 p.m.) The invocation was given by Bishop Clay Jorgensen from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:03:11 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by City Attorney Chet Adams. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:03:44 p.m.) None. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:03:50 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the agenda as posted. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: (Time: 3:04:21 p.m.) 3.1 Regular Meeting of May 11, 2009 A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 11, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Proclamation – Reno Rodeo Days (Time: 3:04:55 p.m.) Council Member Salerno read a proclamation naming June 18-27, 2009, as Reno Rodeo Days in recognition of the 90th year of the Reno Rodeo, the “Wildest, Richest rodeo in the West.” The proclamation was accepted by Mr. Gordy Collins, this year’s President of the Reno Rodeo Association.

Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of June 8, 2009

Page 2 of 10

4.2 Proclamation – Secret Witness Day (Time: 3:08:36 p.m.) Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming June 9, 2009, as Secret Witness Day in recognition of the 30th year of the Secret Witness program. The proclamation was accepted by the Chair, Katherine Louder, along with several board members of the Secret Witness program.

4.3 Proclamation – United States Army Week (Time: 3:13:47 p.m.)

Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming May June 8-14, 2009, as United States Army Week in recognition of its birthday and urged all citizens to express their gratitude to those who have served and those who are now serving to protect our nation and its freedom. The proclamation was accepted by Staff Sgt. Michael Coley and Staff Sgt. Brian Worth.

4.4 Presentation – Update on Brand Leadership Team (Time: 3:17:33 p.m.)

Community Relations Manager Adam Mayberry introduced Mr. Paul Curtis. Mr. Curtis provided the Council with an update on the activities of the Brand Leadership Team (BLT) in evaluating the recommendations of the consultant that Sparks should become an event oriented community as part of our brand development.

5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:28:57 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.16. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


transfers for the period May 7, 2009, through May 20, 2009 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.

5.2 Consideration and possible approval of the Hospital Services Agreement

with Saint Mary’s Regional Medical Center as entered into through the Participation Agreement with Nevada Health Partners and the Nevada Health Care Coalition

An agenda item from Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson recommending the Council renew the City’s Hospital Service Agreement with St. Mary’s. The agreement will allow the City to continue to receive favorable rates, effective July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2012.

5.3 Consideration and Possible Approval of a contract with Bank of America,

N.A., for the provision of banking services An agenda item from Purchasing Manager Dan Marran recommending the Council renew the City’s agreement with Bank of America for the provision of day-to-day banking services through June 30, 2014. The agreement utilizes extreme economies of scale by utilizing terms/prices offered to the State of Nevada under a contract that was bid in 2008. Use of the State’s contract will result in savings to the City estimated to be about 50% over the previous contract.

5.4 Consideration and possible approval of a Final Subdivision Map for Kiley

Ranch Business Park Commercial/Industrial Subdivision An agenda item from City Surveyor Andy Fuller recommending the Council approve A Final Subdivision Map for a commercial/industrial subdivision as a continuation of the Kiley Ranch


Page 3 of 10

North Planned Development. The current zoning is NUD and the developer will be Kiley Ranch, LLC.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of personnel complement changes and the addition of two new classifications in the Communications Section of the Sparks Police Department

An agenda item from Human Resources recommending the City Council reclassify the position of Police Sergeant to a newly created classification of Emergency Communications Manager and reclassify the positions of emergency Communications Specialist to a newly created classification of Emergency Communications Supervisor in the Communications Section of the Sparks Police Department and make the appropriate personnel complement changes to correspond with the classification changes. By making these changes, the Communications Section of the Police Department will have a long-term fully functional manager with a better understanding of the operations of the Communications section and a supervisor that can make immediate decisions 24/7 in the absence of the manager. The financial impact is estimated at $15,892. Approval would add one position in the Communications Section which would remain frozen until funds are available to fill the position.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval to add the position of Emergency

Communications Manager in the Management, Professional and Technical Resolution

An agenda item from Human Resources recommending the City Council approve the addition this position in conjunction with items 5.5, 5.7, and 5.8. The resolution must be amended to add the position of Emergency Communications Manager. By adding this classification, there is no alteration in the language of the current resolution, but it will require changes to “Appendix A – Management Job Class and Salary Wage Ranges.” This change would be effective July 6, 2009, the beginning of the first full pay period of fiscal year 2009/2010.


(MOU) between the City of Sparks and Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3 to add the position of Emergency Communications Supervisor in the Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3 Supervisors Contract

An agenda item from Human Resources recommending the City Council approve this MOU in conjunction with items 5.5, 5.6, and 5.8. This MOU will add the position of Emergency Communications Supervisor to Appendix A of the Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3 Supervisors Contract.


(MOU) between the City of Sparks and Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3 to eliminate the position of Emergency Communications Specialist in the Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3 Non-Supervisors Contract

An agenda item from Human Resources recommending the City Council approve this MOU in conjunction with items 5.5, 5.6, and 5.7. This MOU will eliminate the position of Emergency Communications Specialist in Appendix A of the Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3 Non Supervisory Contract.


Page 4 of 10

5.9 Consideration and possible approval of the expenditure of an amount not to exceed $250,000 for the acquisition of permanent and temporary construction easements and pasture restoration to facilitate the construction of the Spanish Springs Sanitary Sewer Phase 3 Project

An agenda item from Property Agent David Vill recommending the City Council approve the expenditure of $250,000 for the acquisition of permanent and temporary construction easements and pasture restoration to facilitate the construction of the Spanish Springs Sanitary Sewer Phase 3 Project. Funds for easement acquisition are available for this project. The project consists of 4.4 miles of new and replacement sanitary sewer interceptor piping. The construction requires easements from four property owners and the restoration of pasture areas affected by construction.

5.10 Consideration and possible approval of a 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic

Control Devices (MUTCD) Sign Compliance Program to Kustom Koatings, Inc., in the amount of $49,695

An agenda item from Transportation Manager Jon Ericson recommending the City Council approve the award of a sign compliance program to Kustom Koatings. This project involves the removal of noncompliant stop signs, street name signs and sign posts and furnishing and installing MUTCD compliant signs. Kustom Koatings is being recommended as the lowest informal quote for the project.

5.11 Consideration and possible approval of the informal quote for the 2008/2009

Bike Path Repair Project CIP 9046 to Atlas Contractors in the amount of $49,653.50

An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending the City Council approve the award of a bike path repair project to the lowest informal quote—Atlas Contractors. This project involves the resurfacing of existing river bike pathway within three city parks along the river. The existing pathway has deteriorated and is in need of repair. The project requires milling of the existing pathway and installing a new 10 foot wide, three inch thick asphalt pathway at Fishermen’s Park on Galletti Way, Cottonwood Park on Spice Islands Drive and Gateway Park at the Greg Street Overpass. Funds are available for this project.


Agreements as presented by Staff for a total of 38.287 acre-feet of water rights in the amount of $497,731 plus one half the closing costs, which is approximated at $1,600

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas recommending the City Council approve the purchase of water rights as outlined in the staff report. The purchase is broken down as follows: 11.805 acre feet purchased from North Valley Holdings for $153,465; 16.87 acre feet purchased from North Valley Holdings for $219,310; and 9.612 acre feet purchased from Venture Farms.

5.13 Consideration and possible approval of a contract for Professional Services

with Odyssey Engineering, Inc. for the Quail Street Sewer Rehabilitation Project for an amount not to exceed $30,500

An agenda item from Civil Engineer John Martini recommending the City Council approve a contract for professional services as solicited by the city staff. As part of the City’s


Page 5 of 10

infrastructure assessment and maintenance program, it has been determined that the existing sanitary sewer infrastructure located south of Quail Street, north of Greenbrae School, east of 4th Street and west of 1st Street (Greenbrae Terrace area) are in need of rehabilitation and/or replacement. This contract will provide the design specifications and bid documents for the necessary to reroute and reconstruct the sewer lines within Quail Street. Odyssey Engineering was selected from the list of approved engineering firms due to their experience with underground utilities.

5.14 Consideration and possible award of the bid for “Pump Control Valves Purchase for Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility,” bid No. 08/09-029, to Western Nevada Supply, in the amount of $65,224

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas recommending the City Council award the bid for the purchase of four pump control valves, factory representation for start-up, and inspection and adjustment of valves after installation. (Installation shall occur under a separate contract.) (Time: 3:51:16 p.m.) Immediately after the conclusion of item 6.2 and prior to discussion of item 6.3, Council Member Salerno asked for reconsideration of Agenda Item 5.14, stating he should have made a disclaimer on this item. A motion for reconsideration was passed and the Council reconsidered approval of this item as follows: A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Agenda Item 5.14. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSTAIN. Motion carried.

5.15 Consideration and possible approval of Bid #08/09-027 to supply the Truckee

Meadows Water Reclamation Facility with Sodium Hydroxide with Sierra Chemical for the annual amount of $37,177.12

An agenda item from Operations Superintendent Starlin Jones recommending the City Council award the bid for sodium hydroxide used to treat the nitrification towers in order to eradicate and control snails. The contract is for June 30, 2009 through September 30, 2009, with the possibility of 15 three month term renewals. Funds were budgeted for this expense.

5.16 Consideration and possible approval of American Recovery and

Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) Application

An agenda item from Deputy Public Works Director Pete Etchart recommending the City Council approve a grant application under the ARRA which includes the City of Sparks Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy. If approved, the City of Sparks will receive $640,000 for energy efficiency and conservation projects. 6. General Business:

6.1 Consideration and possible approval of the Mayor’s recommendation of appointments to the Civil Service Commission, Park & Recreation Commission, Reno-Tahoe Airport Authority Board of Trustees, and Sparks Advisory Committee for the Disabled (Time: 3:29:32 p.m.)


Page 6 of 10

Mayor Martini announced his recommendations for appointment to the Civil Service Commission were Steve Burley and Louis Dauria. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the appointment of Steve Burlie and Louis Dauria to the Civil Service Commission as recommended by the Mayor. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. Mayor Martini announced his recommendations for appointment to the Parks and Recreation Commission were Angela Fuss and Roy O’Connell. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the appointment of Angela Fuss and Roy O’Connell to the Parks and Recreation Commission as recommended by the Mayor. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. Mayor Martini announced his recommendation for appointment to the Reno-Tahoe Airport Authority Board of Trustees was William Eck. Council Member Salerno noted that Mr. Eck was not his choice to be appointed to the Reno-Tahoe Airport Authority Board of Trustees as he felt there were more qualified applicants. However, he will be supporting the Mayor’s recommendation. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve the appointment of William Eck to the Reno-Tahoe Airport Authority Board of Trustees as recommended by the Mayor. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. Mayor Martini announced his recommendations for appointment to the Sparks Advisory Committee for the Disabled were Laura Sheldon-Casson and Dennis Thorman. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the appointment of Laura Sheldon-Casson and Dennis Thorman to the Sparks Advisory Committee for the Disabled as recommended by the Mayor. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Government Affairs Manager Rob Joiner noted that the Legislative session was over and the Government Affairs Team will be putting together a comprehensive report once the Governor has signed all the bills. He then discussed the bills that had the biggest impact on the City as follows: AB543 and AB552—combined these two bills will cost the City about $652,000; between taking funds from the property tax capital improvement fund and additions to our administrative fee on


Page 7 of 10

sales tax administration. It could have been much worse and we dodged a lot of hits to our redevelopment agency and STAR Bonds. AB422—we supported and worked with the sponsors of that bill for over a year and provided amendments to improve the process. We did not actively try to kill this bill, but it did go down the last evening of the session. AB540—an assessment on each employee for the administration of the Employee Management Relations Board. We are still assessing some of the abatements that the Legislature passed telling the Cities what to do. There were a lot of bills that were going to affect us regarding how we deal with consultants after they leave employment with City—those bills were amended to only affect State employees. There are going to be a lot of studies. We supported a study on local government authority. AB494—consolidation of services. We supported that where it made sense to do consolidation of services. This was revised so that each local government within Washoe and Clark Counties are to do their own consolidation study (and fund it themselves) and give individual reports to the Legislature and it will be brought back at the next legislative session. Mayor Martini said he thought we had already submitted a study. Mr. Joiner said yes, we did; however, we are being directed to update/redo the study. Mr. Joiner noted that the following bills failed: fluoridation bill; STAR Bonds bill; bill for study of Consolidated Tax; and the PERS and PEB bill reform. Bills looking at worker’s compensation, prevailing wage and how we deal with contracts and preference for local contractors also failed. AB397—we stayed neutral on this bill. It stated that when you have a redevelopment agency and have funds that are discretionary, you look at helping inner city schools. We have done this, but obviously there are redevelopment agencies that don’t have schools in their district. This bill was hijacked during the last hours of the session and amended to remove the statutes for STAR Bonds and another provision that was offered as an amendment in this bill would have provided an opportunity for an initiative process by citizens to kill our redevelopment agencies. Thankfully, the amendments died, but they also killed the whole bill, which could have been a good bill. Neither SB175 (flood project bill) nor AB494 (consolidation study bill) have been signed by the Governor as of today. After session, the Governor has 10 days to sign bills (not including weekends). Council Member Carrigan asked what happened to our charter bill. Mr. Joiner said it died a slow death, because it was amended with a bill on changing our elections to ward elections in the general election for the City Council and Mayor. The direction of Council was to not accept the changes and the bill was allowed to die.


Page 8 of 10

Council asked Mr. Joiner to provide information on whether or not our ward elections are constitutional and how much potential the legislative mandates have for costing the citizens of Sparks additional money. (Time: 3:50:23 p.m.) Council Member Salerno asked for reconsideration of Agenda Item 5.14, stating that after reading the item, he noted that the bid is being awarded to a company he does business with and he should have made a disclaimer on this item. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to reconsider Agenda Item 5.14. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSTAIN. Motion carried. Agenda Item 5.14 was then reconsidered at this time. The discussion and vote are listed under item 5.14.

6.3 Consideration and possible acceptance of donation from the State of Nevada, Office of Traffic Safety Joining Forces Grant in the amount of $28,000 (Time: 3:51:55 p.m.)

Deputy Police Chief Steve Keefer noted that the Sparks Police Department has the opportunity to receive a grant through the State of Nevada to purchase nine PDAs, with printers. This is a device that traffic officers use in the field to allow them to be more efficient in sending traffic crash data reports to the State. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to accept the Joining Forces Grant in the amount of $28,000 from the State of Nevada Office of Traffic Safety. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.4 Consideration and possible direction to initiate an amendment to the 2007

Truckee Meadows Regional Plan to remove the reference to the Spanish Springs Joint Plan (Time: 3:53:41 p.m.)

Senior Planner Jim Rundle asked the Council to provide direction to the Regional Planning Agency and staff to amend the Regional Plan. There is currently a requirement in the Regional Plan that requires the City of Sparks and Washoe County to submit a joint plan for most of the Spanish Springs area. This was required back in the late 80’s. In the early 90’s the City of Sparks incorporated all of those land uses into the NSSOI plan. Washoe County included it into their Spanish Springs Area Plan. Therefore, essentially, those requirements have all been taken care of. Mr. Rundle displayed a map and discussed current planning procedures and stated that in opinion of City and County staff, this requirement needs to be removed from the Regional Plan. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to direct staff to initiate a Regional Plan Amendment and remove the reference to Spanish Springs as a joint planning area. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Page 9 of 10

6.5 Consideration and possible award of a bid for the Truckee River Backflow Project sites 5, 7, 9, 10, and 11, Bid No. 08/09-030, PWP # WA-2009-255, to MKD Construction, Inc., a Nevada corporation, in the amount of $220,000 (Time: 3:58:39 p.m.)

Flood Control Manager Shawn Gooch noted this was a bid for five backflow prevention devices and their installation along the Truckee River. The engineer’s estimate for this project was $440,000 and the low bid came in at $220,000. This is an indication that prices are getting very competitive right now. Several years ago the City installed backflow prevention devices at two sites along the river with a grant from FEMA. This bid award will provide the next five devices in this sequence. We still have two remaining to be done and staff is still working on the details of the last two installations. City Manager Carey noted that this is a commitment the city is making to reduce flooding in the industrial area until the full flood control project is completed at some point in the future. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to award the bid for the Truckee River Backflow Project to MKD Construction, Inc. in the amount of $220,000. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.6 Possible direction to initiate a code amendment to allow Renewable Energy Production within the city of Sparks and Sphere of Influence (Time: 4:01:30 p.m.)

Senior Planner Karen Melby stated that given recent technology and the growing emphasis on renewal energy, more businesses and homeowners are considering the installation of renewal energy systems. Planning staff is experiencing growing interest in the development of commercial renewal energy production plants, particularly in the East Truckee Canyon and Sparks’ Sphere Of Influence. Currently, the Sparks zoning code does not specifically allow renewable energy production. In 2005, the State legislature enacted an amendment to NRS 278.580 to promote the use of solar and wind energy systems under certain circumstances and to require that local governments amend their codes to permit such systems. Staff has concerns regarding esthetics, noise, nuisance, safety, and site placement; plus any potential impacts a large-scale energy production facility can have. These concerns point towards the need for Sparks to adopt location and other standards to allow for regulating energy production. With the appropriate standards, renewable energy may be allowed, on some scale, in almost all of our zoning districts. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to direct staff to initiate a code amendment to Title 20 zoning code to allow for Renewable Energy Production within the city of Sparks and Sphere of Influence. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.7 The First Reading and Possible Discussion of Bill No. 2606, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 14 of the Sparks Municipal Code to Update the Fire Code, and providing other matters properly related thereto (Time: 4:04:00 p.m.)


Page 10 of 10

City Clerk Linda Patterson read Bill No. 2606, by title. Mayor Martini announced that the Public Hearing, Second Reading, and possible approval of this bill is scheduled for the Regular City Council Meeting of June 22, 2009.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: (Time:

4:05:02 p.m.) None.

8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items: (Time: 4:05:02 p.m.) None.

9. Comments:

9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 4:05:02 p.m.) None.

10. Adjournment (Time: 4:05:06 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:05 p.m. ______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________

City Clerk

>>>

Page 1 of 14

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 3:00 P.M. Monday, June 22, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:02:04 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:02 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:02:31 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Ron Smith, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Council Members Phillip Salerno and Mike Carrigan, ABSENT. Staff Present: Joe Grogan, Steve Lemus, Steve Keefer, Steve Driscoll, Dave Tallent, Andy Flock, Neil Krutz, Bob King, Chris Syverson, Gary Hutchison, Andy Hummel, Chris Cobb, Dan Marran, Heidi Shaw, Tracy Wheeler, Debi Hunt, Wayne Webber, Tom Minton, Adam Mayberry, Joann Meacham, Randy Mellinger, Stan Sherer Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:02:39 p.m.) The invocation was given by Pastor Dan Sipma from University Family Fellowship. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:04:00 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Julia Ratti. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:04:15 p.m.) Mr. Richard (Skip) Daly spoke regarding apparent violations of the procurement code with regard to rejection of all bids for a large sewer project. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:12:01 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. Mayor Martini noted that Agenda Item 5.7 was being pulled from the agenda for separate discussion and vote and that Item 7.2 would have a public hearing, but the item would be continued to another date due to some documentation problems. City Manager Carey noted that Item 5.7 was being pulled to allow staff to update the Council on some numbers that have changed. He also asked that Item 5.2 be pulled for separate discussion and vote for the same reason. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting for June 22, 2009

Page 2 of 14

3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: (Time: 3:14:43 p.m.) 3.1 Regular Meeting of May 26, 2009 A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 26, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Presentation on H1N1 flu (Time: 3:15:09 p.m.) District Health Officer Mary A. Anderson, MD, MPH and Randall Todd, DrPH – Epidemiology & Public Health Preparedness gave an update on the Novel Influenza A H1N1 (AKA Swine Flu) and the steps the Washoe County Health Department is taking to prevent the spread of the virus in our area as outlined below:

� ��

� � ��

� ��

� ��

� � ��

� � �� !�"�

� #��$%&�$''(�)�*��+��, �-�+��.�/�

� #��%'&�$''(�)�*��+��, �-�+��.�(��

� 0��&�$''(�)�*��+��, �-�+��.��%&$�/�

� ��, ��1��2��

� 2��-��, ��, ��-��-��-��

��, ��3�

� ��, ��, �-��4 ��, , ��

� ��-�, ��"�

� � �� 5� ��-�� 6�2��

� 2��7��, ��, ��

� 2��$�7�#�, ��5-�, ��4 ��-6��8�, ��-��-��-��)�2��

��-�, ��

� 2��%�7�#�, ��-��, ��-��, �)��)

��, ��, ��

� 2��9�7��-��, �)��)��, ��, ��

� 2��:�7��-��, �)��)��, ��, ��4 ��-��$��, ��

� ��

� 2��;�7��-��-�� 7�2�-�, ��2��5��

0��&�$''(6�

� ��-�, ��"�

�


Page 3 of 14

�

� ��)��

� ��-��

� *��

� ��-��, ��

� <�� 7��=� �#�

� =��+��7�=��+��+�, ��

� �� 7�� >+�� -��

� ��, �

� ?��, �-��

� �� )��7�� +��

� ��)��

� 2��, ��

� ��

� ��-��

� @��-��

� #� ��:'�

� 2��#��

� >��

� >��, ��

� ��

� #��, �-��

� ��-��

� ��

� � ��

� ��+��

� 2��)��

� �, ��, ��-��

� �, ��

� � ��

� 2��-��

� ��

� *��, ��-��

� *��

� � ��

� 2��)��-��

� � �� !�"�

� #��4 ��"�)�2��

� ��"�

� A��7�2��

� >��

� 2� ��

� ��-��, ��-��"�

� ��

� � ��

� ��, ��B�C��

� ��-��, �-��"�

� =��7�+�� 2��

4.2 Presentation regarding the All Star Band’s trip to Longford, Ireland (Time:

3:37:31 p.m.) Mr. Duane Hollenbeck noted that about two years ago the band visited our sister city, Girabaldi, Oregon, along with several Council Members, as part of a musical cultural exchange during their local celebration, “Girabaldi Days,” festival and on that trip he was informed about our other sister city, Longford, Ireland. About a year after that trip, they received an invitation from the City of Longford for our band to attend their music festival in 2009. He said that instead of having just Reed High School participate in this trip, it was opened up to all the band members


Page 4 of 14

from all three high schools in Sparks. Fifty-five people from both Reed and Sparks High Schools have committed to going on the trip and they have been actively doing fund raising projects to pay for the trip. Mr. Hollenbeck provided detailed plans and discussed what they are doing to prepare for the trip. 5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:49:41 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Consent Items 5.1, 5.3 through 5.6, 5.8 through 5.24. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

5.1 Report of Claims and Bills approved for payment and appropriation transfers for the period May 21, 2009, through June 3, 2009


5.2 Consideration and possible approval of appropriation transfers between accounts within funds (Time: 3:50:14 p.m.)

An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the appropriation transfers between accounts within funds as presented. City Manager Carey stated that each year the Finance Department looks at our budget to make sure that they complete the necessary transfers between funds. He noted that the list of transfers are now available and part of the records. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve the appropriation transfers between accounts within funds as submitted. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

5.3 Consideration and possible acceptance of dispositioned evidence converted to

City use An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the Council approve the use of evidence which has been converted for use by the Police Department, per SMC 9.70.040, as follows: two lap top computers; computer speakers; a computer projector; a lap top case; a car stereo; two DVD players; and two digital cameras. The Police Department is saving money that normally would be spent to purchase these items new.

5.4 Consideration and possible execution of a five-year agreement to accept

wastewater from Hidden Valley Manufacturing An agenda item from Senior Administrative Analyst Gary Hutchinson recommending approval of a long-term agreement with Hidden Valley Manufacturing (HVM) for disposal of their wastewater at the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility (TMWRF). HVM will truck their waste to the treatment facility for a charge of $0.075 per gallon. The per gallon charge is fixed for the term of the agreement, but can be adjusted should treatment costs change by more than 5% per year. HVM will provide a one time contribution of $125,000 to the city to allow for improvement to the septage receiving infrastructure at TMWRF. Annual income to the City is estimated at $225,000, based on actual volume of waste.


Page 5 of 14

5.5 Consideration and possible approval to purchase various commercial insurance policies to protect the financial interests of the City in Fiscal Year 2009-2010 in the amount of $411,486

An agenda item from Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson recommending approval of commercial insurance policies for the City. The lines of coverage which are commercially insured include: property and contents; general liability, auto liability, auto physical damage (for higher valued vehicles—includes a $10,000 deductible), employee dishonesty, tenants and permittees (to protect the City and those renting our facilities), and excess worker’s compensation (with a $1.5 million self-insured retention). The total estimated premium is not final and will be adjusted, depending on variations in actual exposures throughout the course of the policy year.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval to purchase various commercial

insurance policies to protect the financial interests of the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility in Fiscal year 2009-2010 in the amount of $224,303

An agenda item from Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson recommending approval of commercial insurance policies for the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility (TMWRF). The lines of coverage which are commercially insured include: property and contents—including boiler and machinery exposures); pollution legal liability, general liability—to cover premises exposures and acts of its employees. General liability claims over $100,000 are handled via the City’s master general liability policy; claims under that amount are handled by Risk Management under the City’s self-funded liability program. The overall renewal premium reflects a slight decrease over last year.

5.7 Consideration and possible approval to amend the contract with CDS Group

Health Third Party Administration Services for the City of Sparks (Time: 3:51:24 p.m.)

An agenda item from Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson recommending approval of an amendment to the current contract with CDS Group Health for third party administration of the City’s self-insurance program. The amendment will extend the contract to June 30, 2012 and will decrease rates for the city over the next two fiscal periods. City Manager Carey noted that a technical error was found in the rates listed in the staff report. The errors were in the City’s favour, but staff wanted to provide the correct numbers. Ms. Syverson stated that the correct fees to CDS per active member are $10.10 in 2010; $19.58 in 2011; and $24.10 in 2012. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Consent Item 5.7. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

5.8 Consideration and possible approval of a contract to purchase stop loss insurance from National Union Fire Insurance Company for the City’s self-funded group health benefits program in the amount of $332,297.28

An agenda item from Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson recommending approval to purchase stop loss insurance, as outlined in the staff report. In order to protect the insurance


Page 6 of 14

program from individual catastrophic medical claims in excess of $200,000, the city purchases stop loss insurance up to the plan’s individual lifetime maximum of $2,000,000.

5.9 Consideration and possible approval of a contract with Standard Insurance

Company-providing life insurance, accidental death and dismemberment (AD&D) insurance and long-term disability (LTD) insurance in the amount of $111,472.02

An agenda item from Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson recommending approval to renew the City’s contract with Standard Insurance Company for life and disability insurance as outlined in the staff report.

5.10 Consideration and possible approval of a contract for the provision of Video

Production Services with Sierra Nevada Community Access Television (SNCAT) for the annual cost of $32,980 (Bid #08/09-026 Re-Bid)

An agenda item from community Relations Manager Adam Mayberry recommending approval of a contract with SNCAT, the incumbent provider of video production services for the City of Sparks. SNCAT was successful as the lowest responsive bidder for a scope of services that is significantly reduced from previous years. The proposed contract term is one year with three additional one year options.

5.11 Consideration and possible approval of the award of the multi-agency Bid

#08/09-024 to Ferral Gas and approval of the contract specific to the City of Sparks for the provision of Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPD, aka Propane) in the amount of $27,000

An agenda item from Purchasing Manager Dan Marran recommending a bid award for propane and related equipment/services to Ferrelgas for an initial contract period of one year, commencing July 1, 2009, with two potential one-year options to extend the contract. The City of Sparks is the lead agency in offering a bid for the provision of propane gas to multiple public agencies in Northern Nevada. This bid and resulting contract establishes the vendor and the initial price on this commodity for the next fiscal year. The contract may then be joined by other public agencies without the need to go out for their own bid.

5.12 Consideration and possible award of the 2009 Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk

Program, Bid Number 08/09-033, PWP WA-2009-266, CIP Number 9092 to MKD Construction, Inc., in the amount of $328,999

An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending a bid award for annual curb, gutter, and sidewalk repairs. The scope of work includes removal and replacement of existing curbs, gutter, and sidewalk on York Way between 16th Street and 18th Street; Nelson Way between Gault and York Way; Gault Way between Pyramid and 4th Street; and a section on Stanford Way on the southwest corner of Stanford and Lincoln. Drainage improvements are included in this work and existing catch basins will be replaced with newer basins. The City has conducted this same type of neighborhood improvement for the past few years in this general area.

5.13 Consideration and possible approval of the Informal Quote for the 2009

Merchant Street Concrete Improvements Project to Reno Concrete, in the amount of $49,888


Page 7 of 14

An agenda item from Transportation Manager Jon Ericson recommending award of an informal quote for concrete improvements on Merchant Street. The existing curb and gutter have deteriorated and are in need of repair and the existing handicap ramps are not compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act. This project involves the removal and replacement of existing curb and gutter, valley gutter and handicap ramps. Funds are available for this project.

5.14 Consideration and possible award of the Informal Quote for the 2009 Nichols

Boulevard and Howard Drive Roundabout Improvements to Anchor Concrete, in the amount of $60,887

An agenda item from Transportation Manager Jon Ericson recommending award of an informal quote for removal of existing asphalt and replacement with concrete at the Nichols Boulevard and Howard Drive Roundabout. Funds are available for this project.


for reimbursement with the Regional Transportation Commission in the amount of $37,950 to replace storm drain facilities as part of the Deming Way, Bergin Way, Franklin Way and Meredith Way reconstruction project

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Andrew Hummel recommending approval of an agreement to reimburse the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) for replacing storm drain facilities for the City as part of their roadway reconstruction project. This agreement will allow the needed City work to be done at the same time as the RTC roadway rehabilitation and provide reduced traffic impacts as well as a small cost savings to the City.

5.16 Consideration and possible approval of the Informal Quote for the 2008/2009

Catch Basin Repair Project, CIP 9094, to Q&D Construction, Inc., in the amount of $42,500

An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending award of an informal quote for removal and replacement of fifteen catch basins in areas slated for roadwork. The general areas to be impacted are Shadow Lane between Longridge Drive and Deep Creek Drive and Whitewood Drive and Tangerine Street. These areas are scheduled for asphalt repair within the next two years. Appropriations have been set aside for this drainage inlet upgrade project.

5.17 Consideration and possible award of the Alf Sorensen Re-Roof Project Base

Bid and Alternate A, Bid No. 08/09-035, PWP No. WA-2009-272, to Bison Construction, in the amount of $428,800

An agenda item from Capital Projects Coordinator Ross Soderstrom recommending a bid award for re-roof of the Alf Sorensen Community Center, including the removal of the existing roof, siding, and gutters and the installation of new roof, gutters, and a drainage system. Funds for this project were budgeted in the 08/09 CIP.

5.18 Consideration and possible acceptance of a Proposal for Rock Park

Monitoring and Mitigation Program with Summit Engineering Corporation, in the amount of $114,000

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Andrew Hummel recommending approval of a consultant agreement for monitoring the white water park in accordance with the Army Corps of Engineers operating permit. The required monitoring will be funded using appropriations from various park funds for this year and will be specifically budgeted for next fiscal year.


Page 8 of 14

5.19 Consideration and possible approval for the purchase of signal operation supplies for projects and inventory in the amount of $69,296 from Phoenix Highway Products, Inc.

An agenda item from Traffic Superintendent Dave Tallent recommending the City Council approve the purchase of a replacement traffic signal cabinet for the corner of El Rancho and Prater Way; installation of detection system upgrades at I-80 and 4th Street; and needed inventory necessary for the maintenance of existing traffic signaled intersections. The City’s electrical crew will perform installation of the equipment. Appropriations are available for this expenditure.

5.20 Consideration and possible award of Fire Station No. 2 HVAC Remodel &

Generator Replacement Project, Bid No. 08/09-037, PWP No. WA-2009-276, to Isbell Construction, in the amount of $154,070

An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending award of the bid for the removal of the existing emergency generator, ground mounted HVAC unit, boiler heating unit, and composition flat roof area and replacement with a new diesel generator, three 1.5 ton roof-mounted HVAC units, gas fired radiant heaters for the bays, and installation of a PVC membrane roof for Fire Station No. 2. Funds were budgeted for this project.

5.21 Consideration and possible award of the Sparks Public Works Maintenance

Building Remodel Project to Isbell Construction, Incorporated, CIP 9134, in the amount of $74,487.32

An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending approval of the bid for opening three equipment bays, constructing a shower, ADA bathroom, locker room, breakroom sink and cabinets, along with opening up parts of to allow for more efficient use of the space. This work will enable maintenance personnel to work more effectively on larger equipment. This project was budgeted in the CIP and funds are available for this work.

5.22 Consideration and possible award of the City of Sparks Maintenance Yard Improvement Project Phase 2, Bid Number 08/09-034, PWP WA-2009-271, CIP Numbers 9023, 9083, and 9133 to Q&D Construction, including alternate 1 in the amount of $144,450

An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending the City Council award the bid for reconstruction of a portion of the existing asphalt facilities at the maintenance yard utilizing concrete rather than asphalt. This will provide durability to withstand heavy truck traffic. Funds have been appropriated for this project.

5.23 Consideration and possible award of the Golden Eagle Regional Park Traffic

Signal Project to Titan Electrical Contracting, in the amount of $182,620 An agenda item from Transportation Manager Jon Ericson recommending the City Council award the bid for installation of a traffic signal system on Vista Boulevard at the entrance to the Golden Eagle Regional Park to provide better vehicle and pedestrian access. Funds are available for this project.

5.24 Consideration and possible approval of Consultant Services Agreement Amendment 1 with Fluid Concepts for additional design, permitting and


Page 9 of 14

construction management of the Pioneer Diversion reconstruction, in the amount of $63,140

An agenda item from Flood Control Manager Shawn Gooch recommending the City Council approve an amendment to A-3679 to provide for the balance of the work on the Pioneer Diversion project. Funds are budgeted in Fiscal Year 2009/2010 for the remainder of this project.


6.1 Consideration and possible acceptance of donation from the State of Nevada-Enforcing Underage Drinking Laws Grant in the amount of $10,000 (Time: 3:52:37 p.m.)

Deputy Police Chief Steve Keefer this grant will be used mostly for compliance checks. They plan to run 14 events; 10 events will take place where alcohol is served and the outcome is publicized in the local paper. He said some of the funding will be used to pay for overtime for officers doing compliance checks at the Farmer’s Market for underage drinking. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to accept the donation from the State of Nevada in the amount of $10,000. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.2 Consideration and possible approval of renewing the city’s membership in the Reno-Sparks Chamber of Commerce for 2009-10, and the city’s membership in the National League of Cities for 2009-10 and 2010-11 (Time: 3:55:07 p.m.)

City Manager Carey introduced members from the Reno-Sparks Chamber and noted that they are lowering our membership rate, based on the number of people currently employed with the City, compared to last year. The rate would be lowered to $1,338.30. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to renew the city’s membership in the Reno-Sparks Chamber of Commerce for 2009-10. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried. City Manager Carey noted that Membership for the National League of Cities begins May 1 of each year and this year the amount $5,401. He emphasized that the National League of Cities provides many opportunities and benefits to the City. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to renew the city’s membership in the National League of Cities for 2009-10 and 2010-11. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.3 Discussion and possible approval of Amendment #1 to the Interlocal

Agreement for Services Related to the Operation of the Homeless Community Assistance Center between the City of Sparks, the City of Reno and Washoe County (Time: 4:02:18 p.m.)

Grants Administrator Tracy Wheeler noted that this agreement (A-3688) outlines the day-to-day


Page 10 of 14

oversight of the Community Assistance Center which houses the emergency shelters for men, women, and transitional housing for families. The amendment outlines the fiscal and in-kind contributions from all three entities and incorporates the April 13th Council approval of a $25,000 contribution to the center for next fiscal year. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Amendment #1. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.4 Consideration and possible adoption of Resolution No. 3142 to augment the 2008/2009 budget of the City of Sparks (Time: 4:04:02 p.m.)

Accounting Manager Debi Hunt noted that this resolution will augment the budget for four funds: two are special revenue funds and the other two are capital projects. Revenues are available for augmentation through unanticipated revenues and fund balance. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Resolution No. 3142. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.5 Consideration and possible adoption of Resolution No. 3143, designating

certain employees as Executive; providing salaries for employees in these positions; providing benefits for these employees; providing for the repeal of all prior resolutions related to these employees; and providing other matters properly related thereto (Time: 4:05:20 p.m.)

Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson noted that the current resolution for Executive Employees will expire June 30, 2009 and this will replace that resolution. She noted the following changes in the resolution: furloughs were increased from two to four weeks, on a voluntary basis; the City Manager is also allowed to provide some non-monetary considerations for furloughs, should he so desire. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Resolution No. 3143. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.6 Consideration and possible adoption of Resolution No. 3144, designating certain employees as Management, Professional and Technical; providing salaries for employees in these positions; providing benefits for these employees; providing for the repeal of all prior resolutions related to these employees; and providing other matters properly related thereto (Time: 4:06:42 p.m.)

Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson noted that the current Management resolution expires June 30, 2009. She outlined the changes in the new resolution as follows: changes the furlough from two to four weeks; the City Manager has non-monetary considerations; increases the longevity from $2,500 to $3,000 in Fiscal Year 10/11; increases annual and sick leave conversion tables.


Page 11 of 14

Council Member Schmitt asked if these were the same changes that were made for other bargaining units. Ms. Syverson confirmed that it was slightly different, but consistent with other employment agreements. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Resolution No. 3144. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.7 Consideration and possible adoption of Resolution No. 3145,

designating certain employees as Deputy Police Chief; providing salaries for employees in these positions; providing benefits for these employees; providing for the repeal of all prior resolutions related to these employees; and providing other matters properly related thereto (Time: 4:08:18 p.m.)

Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson noted that the Deputy Police Chief had his own resolution and the changes were consistent with other bargaining contracts. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Resolution No. 3145. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.8 Consideration and possible adoption of Resolution No. 3146, designating certain employees as Confidential; providing salaries for employees in these positions; providing benefits for these employees; providing for the repeal of all prior resolutions related to these employees; and providing other matters properly related thereto (Time: 4:09:22 p.m.)

Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson stated that the Confidential employees traditionally follow the Operating Engineers contract, so the changes to the resolution include those things that were adopted by that contract. The difference being that the Confidential employees are doing their concessions on a voluntary basis, so they are worded a little differently. The City anticipates seeing a savings of about $35,000 in 2009/2010 and seeing an increase of about $5,000 in 2010/2011. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Resolution No. 3146. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.9 Consideration and possible adoption of Resolution No. 3147, designating certain employees as Assistant and Senior City Attorneys; providing salaries for employees in these positions; providing benefits for these employees; providing for the repeal of all prior resolutions related to these employees; and providing other matters properly related thereto (Time: 4:10:36 p.m.)

Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson stated this is a new resolution. The Assistant and Senior City Attorneys have been removed from the mid-management resolution and given their own resolution. The reason this change was made is directly related to language in the City Charter regarding the ability of the City Attorney to make personnel changes and have staff work at his pleasure.


Page 12 of 14

Ms. Ratti commented that this was a much-needed change and she was happy to see staff move forward with this clarification. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Resolution No. 3147. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried. City Manager Carey extended his appreciation to all the staff covered by these resolutions; they have given up wages and made other concessions, stating this is a testament to the quality of staff we have at the City.

6.10 Discussion and possible direction regarding proposed Kiley Wetlands Preserve (Time: 4:12:50 p.m.)

Utility Manager Joann Meacham provided an update on negotiations with the Kiley Ranch Preservency Foundation to provide effluent water service to keep the wetlands “wet.” The wetlands are the areas within the Kiley Ranch Communities that they are attempting to preserve as wetlands in perpetuity. She noted that staff has provided several options for effluent service to the wetlands and the details are outlined in the staff report. She said staff is working within the confines specified within the Kiley Ranch Communities master agreement for effluent service to the property, as well as Title 13 of the Sparks Municipal Codes. There are a few outstanding issues and staff is asking Council if they have any questions or direction for staff. Ms. Meacham introduced Mr. Paul Curtis, President of the Kiley Ranch Preservency Foundation, which was established to acquire, operate and maintain 250 acres as wetlands. Mr. Curtis stated they have been awarded at State Question 1 grant and they will be closing escrow soon on a property acquisition. Acquisition of water is very important to preserve the wetland values and the State has also awarded them $100,000 to secure up to 70 acre feet of water that had previously allocated to the Kiley Ranch North development project. Mr. Curtis introduced the foundations members and responded to questions from Council. Council Member Schmitt suggested a tour of the property for the staff and Council so that they could better understand the scope of the project. Council Member Ratti noted she had an opportunity to tour the site and stated that this is was an incredible project—a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity—and we need to do everything we can to make this wetland project a success. Ms. Meacham noted that the staff report included a letter of support from the City to the Foundation to assist in obtaining grant funds. However, because they have already been awarded the grant, she was not sure they still needed the letter of support from the City. Mr. Curtis stated they have a long list supporting letters from various private and public entities, but he would still encourage the City to also show their support for the project. He said they are looking to the City as a future partner in this endeavor, because there is still a lot of work to do in the future. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to sign a letter of support for the Kiley Wildlife Preserve project and direct staff to continue working with the Kiley Ranch Preservancy Foundation for effluent water service to the site. Council Members


Page 13 of 14

Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.11 Consideration and possible approval of an Investment Advisory Agreement with Main Street Capital Management, LLC (Time: 4:23:32 p.m.)

Finance Director Tom Minton stated this agreement would be for the long-term portion of our portfolio. Initially it would be for the investment of $68 million in bonds. The CEO of Main Street Capital Management, Mr. Phillips, has extensive experience with local government. The contracts provides for the development of detailed cash flows and production of monthly reports on the investment yields. Mr. Minton noted that Mr. Phillips is giving the City an incredible deal on the fees at $1,000 per month, compared to other offers. He said that this agreement will allow the City to get higher investment yields at a very low fee and free up staff time for other duties. Council Member Ratti expressed concern regarding the risk involved in investing for higher yields. Mr. Minton explained that the City will turn all investing over to Main Street Capital; however, they will have set policies from the City that they must follow when making investments. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve an Investment Advisory Agreement with Main Street Capital Management. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: 7.1 Second Reading, Consideration and Possible Approval of Bill No. 2606, an

Ordinance Amending Chapter 14 of the Sparks Municipal Code to Update the Fire Code; and providing other matters properly related thereto (Time: 4:30:53 p.m.)

Fire Marshall Robert King noted that this ordinance is a cleaning up of the Title 14 Fire Prevention and Protection ordinance. He then outlined the changes as follows:

• Under adoption of the fire codes, Appendix “H” was inadvertently taken out, so it is being added back into the code.

• Taking out the prohibition against partial fire detection and extinguishing systems. • Taking the exception regarding class “C” fireworks out of the code. It was noted that this

does not affect licensed and permitted fire works displays. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed ordinance. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Bill No. 2606 (Ordinance No. 2426) as written and submitted amending Title 14 of the Sparks Municipal Code. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried. 7.2 Consideration and possible approval of the abandonment of an easement for

roadway and utility purposes described as Parcel 2 of that certain Grant, Bargain and Sale Deed, as filed in Official Records of Washoe County, Nevada on December 4, 1969, as Document Number 161114 (Time: 4:34:05 p.m.)


Page 14 of 14

City Manager Carey noted that there was a technical problem with the survey work done on this abandonment which staff is attempting to rectify. Therefore this item is being withdrawn from the agenda. He asked that a public hearing be held, because a public hearing was noticed. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed abandonment. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. No action taken by the City Council at this time. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items: None.

9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 4:35:17 p.m.) In recognition of the Grand Opening held last Thursday, several Council Members thanked the staff from the various City departments for their work on the Legends Project for the past five and a half years. 10. Adjournment Time: 4:36:52 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:36 p.m. _______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________ City Clerk >>>

Page 1 of 9

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 3:00 P.M. Monday, July 13, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:01:33 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:00 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:01:40 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:01:52 p.m.) The invocation was given by Pastor Barb West of the Sparks Church of the Nazarene. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:03:40 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Julia Ratti. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:04:04 p.m.) Ms. Tonya Brown asked the Council to consider setting a City policy regarding how evidence is handled and turned over to the prosecuting attorney’s office. Ms. Flo Jones spoke in support of Ms. Brown’s request. Council expressed doubt that the City Council had the authority to set policy on this issue. City Attorney Adams explained the procedures outlined in the law for turning over evidence and stated he felt that it would be against the law for the City to create a policy providing a defendant with all the evidence collected in a case until the District Attorney makes a decision on whether or not to prosecute. If this is the type of policy that they are asking for, they would need to go to the legislature to get the law changed before the City could create such a policy. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:17:16 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. Items 6.4 and 6.5 were pulled from the agenda. Item 5.10 was pulled for discussion and separate vote. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: 3.1 Regular Meeting of June 8, 2009, and June 22, 2009 (Time: 3:18:20 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to

Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of July 13, 2009

Page 2 of 9

approve the minutes of the regular meetings of June 8, 2009, and June 22, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Proclamation – National Hug Your Kids Day (Time: 3:18:55 p.m.) Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming July 20, 2009, as National Hug Your Kids Day in recognition of the importance of putting family first. The proclamation was accepted by Michelle Nichols, founder of the Hug Your Kids Day movement.

4.2 Proclamation – National Recreation and Parks Month (Time: 3:26:45 p.m.)

Council Member Julia Ratti, who serves on the Parks and Recreation Commission, read a proclamation naming July 2009, as National Recreation and Parks Month in recognition of the importance of our nation’s parks and recreation facilities. The proclamation was accepted by the Parks and Recreation Director Stan Sherer.

4.3 Commendation – Reverend Ray Murray (Time: 3:29:08 p.m.)

Mayor Martini read a commendation recognizing Reverend Ray Murray for his 22 years of service as a Chaplain for the Sparks Police and Fire Departments and wishing him continued good health and happiness in his retirement. The proclamation was accepted by Reverend Ray Murray.

4.4 Presentation to Council by The Nature Conservancy, Mickey Hazelwood,

Truckee River Project Director (Time: 3:31:35 p.m.) Mr. Mickey Hazelwood thanked the Council for their dedication to and support for the Truckee River and river parks in an effort to turn the community’s interest back to the preservation and health of the Truckee River system. He said they are continuing with the restoration of the lower portion of the river and have recently implemented restoration projects at Lockwood, the 102 Ranch property, and will soon implement another project in the Mustang Ranch area. 5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:36:38 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.9. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


transfers for the period June 4, 2009, through June 24, 2009 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.

5.2 Destruction/Disposal of Paper Copy of Documents that have been

microfilmed An agenda item from Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson requesting the City Council approve the disposal of records relating to the 2002-2005 terminated full-time employees as itemized in the staff report, per NRS 239.051 and 239.123.


Page 3 of 9

5.3 Consideration and possible approval of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Development and Maintenance of a Truckee River Coordinated Monitoring Program with fellow interested parties

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas recommending the City Council approve a MOU for the development of a Truckee River coordinated Monitoring Program to provide the mechanism to engage in coordinated efforts to share chemical, physical and biological data and information for a variety of purposes. The initially agencies participating in this MOU are: Nevada Division of environmental Protection; City of Reno; City of Sparks; Nevada Department of Wildlife; University of Nevada, Reno-College of Agriculture, Biotechnology and Natural Resources; Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe; The Nature Conservancy; Truckee Meadows Water Authority; Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility; Truckee River Flood Project; Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office-U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Washoe County Board of Commissioners; and Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board-California Environmental Protection Agency. There is no financial impact at this time.


among Washoe County, City of Reno, City of Sparks, and Washoe County School District for General Vehicle Maintenance and Repair Resource Sharing

An agenda item from Maintenance Superintendent Ron Korman recommending the City Council approve an agreement for sharing services for vehicle maintenance and repair. This proposal will enable each entity to use resources from the other entities for general maintenance and repair work on fleet vehicles (including cars, vans, trucks, buses, and off-road heavy construction equipment) on an as-needed and trade basis. The participating agencies will trade labor hours, and parts will be provided by the agency using the services. Financial reconciliations will be performed on a quarterly basis to monitor balances. At fiscal year-end, any remaining balances will be reimbursed in cash to the providing agencies.

5.5 Consideration and possible award of Contract for Golden Eagle Regional

Park Concessions RFP #08/09-022 to SBA, LLC An agenda item from Parks and Recreation Director Stan Sherer recommending the City Council award a contract to SBAL, LLC to provide concession services a the Golden Eagle Regional Park. Council approved this RFP award on April 13, 2009; however, in trying to expedite the award, staff failed to notice some duplication in the agreement and areas of the agreement that were in need of clarification. This is a five year contract with two five-year extension options. Annual revenue to the City in the amount of a $100,000 lease and 6% of annual sales in excess of natural breakpoint after April 1, 2010 and $4,000 monthly during the construction of the tenant improvements.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval of design services for the Pyramid

Way/Victorian Avenue Landscape and Aesthetics Project to Odyssey Engineering Incorporated in the amount of $74,980

An agenda item from Transportation Manager Jon Ericson recommending the City Council award a design services contract as outlined. The scope of services covers the design phase for the project. The city approved a cooperative agreement with the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) on January 12, 2009. The enhancement project uses 50% state grant money. Upon design completion and approval by NDOT, the project will be placed for bid with


Page 4 of 9

construction scheduled for completion by October, 2010. The total estimated cost of the project is $680,360. NDOT has obligated $340,180, or 50% of the total. The city has agreed to fund the other half of the costs, which may be in the form of approved in-kind services to the project.


for Reimbursement with the Regional Transportation Commission in the amount of $470,000 for Streetscape Improvements on the RTC Victorian Avenue – Pyramid Way to McCarran Boulevard Project

An agenda item from Transportation Manager Jon Ericson recommending the City Council approve and agreement with NDOT for streetscape improvements on Victorian Avenue as part of their pavement reconstruction project. The scope of the project will include a separate bike path, landscape improvements, new sidewalks, and decorative street lighting to complete the final phase of the Victorian streetscape theme. The travel lanes will be reduced from five lanes to three lanes with one lane in the westbound direction and two lanes in the eastbound direction. The total estimated cost for the project is $2.52 million. The city will provide $470,000 towards the improvements and RTC will make up the difference. The project is scheduled for construction mid September of 2009 with completion in December of 2009.

5.8 Consideration and possible approval to modify the Agreement for Sale of

Treated Effluent with Martin Marietta Materials, Inc., reducing the Minimum Annual Demand to 135 acre-feet and the Maximum Annual Demand to 175 acre-feet

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas recommending the City Council approve an amendment to A-3167. Martin Marietta is requesting the modification to reduce their minimum and maximum annual demand amounts. This modification benefits the City because the conserved effluent is released back to the City. There is no financial impact to the City from this amendment.

5.9 Consideration and possible award of the 2009/10 Permanent Patch Program,

CIP #1063, Bid No. 09/10-001, PWP No. WA-2009-312, to Q & D Construction, Inc., in the amount of $249,825

An agenda item from Transportation Manager Jon Ericson recommending the City Council award the annual Permanent Patch Program contract, which is funded through fees. The yearly contract involves the permanent patching of city owned streets that have been cut by permit holders. The contract provides a patch to “Street Cuts” by a single contractor under the direction of the Public Works staff.

5.10 Consideration and possible authorization for the Fire Department to seek a 2010 Homeland Security Assistance to Firefighters Fire Station Construction Grant (Time: 3:37:24 p.m.)

An agenda item from Fire Chief Andy Flock recommending the City Council authorize the Fire Department to seek a grant for upgrades, repair, or replacement of various elements of infrastructure at Fire Station No. 1. If awarded the grant, the city could pursue these infrastructure modifications at little or no cost to the city.


Page 5 of 9

This item was pulled for separate discussion and vote. Chief Flock noted this was a request to apply for a grant to fund some capital improvement projects that are listed in the five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP), but for which there no funds are available, due to the economy. He noted that there will be a fiscal impact to the City in the form of providing in-kind services, should the City be awarded the grant. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Consent Item 5.10. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


6.1 Consideration and possible approval of renewing the City’s financial support for Keep Truckee Meadows Beautiful for fiscal year 2009-10 (Time: 3:39:09 p.m.)

City Manager Shaun Carey noted that the City has received a request from Keep Truckee Meadows Beautiful (KTMB) for financial support in the amount of $6,500 for fiscal year 2009-2010. The City has been a financial supporter of this organization since 1990 and he is recommending that the city fund this request. Ms. Christi Cakiroglu noted that last couple of years they received $8,000 in funding from the City; however, this year they are requesting only $6,500. This will keep all their programs running. She said historically they have been able to provide about $100,000 of in-kind support to the City. She stated they appreciate their partnership with the City and it is their desire to continue the relationship. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve the city’s financial support for Keep Truckee Meadows Beautiful for fiscal year 2009-2010 in the amount of $6,500. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.2 Consideration and possible approval of Resolution #3148; directing the

City's Finance Director to establish non-interest bearing short-term inter-fund loans not to exceed $750,000 to the Sparks Redevelopment Agency #1 revolving fund, and $500,000 to the City of Sparks Victorian Square Room Tax Fund from the City of Sparks General Fund as necessary and in accordance to NAC 350.150. If needed, these funds will be used to implement Phase 2a Capital Improvements for the Sparks Redevelopment Area #1, and pay off the Victorian Square Room Tax Fund's existing credit facility that was established in 2004 and becomes fully due in October 2009 (Time: 3:41:30 p.m.)

Finance Director Tom Minton stated there are some inconsistencies between the staff report and the attached resolution: the staff report talks about two resolutions, but there is only one resolution. Therefore, he is recommending that this item be continued to the regular meeting of July 27, 2009. Council Member Carrigan asked why we were borrowing money to improve the roads when we did not have a developer for the Victorian Square redevelopment area. Mr. Minton stated some


Page 6 of 9

of the reasons are that these are generic improvements that are not likely to change with new development and construction prices are really great right now. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to continue Resolution No. 3148 to the meeting of July 27, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.3 Consideration, discussion and possible ratification of the Purchasing

Manager’s rejection of all bids concerning Bid #08/09-028 (PWP WA-2009-221) for the Federally Funded Spanish Springs Sewer Phase 3 Project (Time: 3:44:12 p.m.)

Purchasing Manager Dan Marran explained that the City received 10 bids for work on the next phase of the Spanish Springs Sanitary Sewer project. In the course of due diligence in evaluating the bids received, staff discovered multiple issues with the original bid documents and specifications that may have led to some or all bidders possibly making assumptions concerning the scheduling of the project and thereby affecting their pricing. Staff believes that the 73% difference between the high and low bids is an indication that the specifications were either unclear or misread and that there was a misunderstanding regarding the deadlines associated with a Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) project adjacent to the Sparks project which were unknown until after the bid date. Mayor Martini asked the City Attorney if it had been determined whether or not the Purchasing Manager had a right to reject all the bits. City Attorney Adams stated that he believes that Mr. Marran has the authority to reject these bids; however, this decision is ultimately going to be left up to the courts. Council Member Salerno asked if the Purchasing Manager had rejected bids in the past. Mr. Marran reviewed instances where bids were rejected in past purchasing transactions. Mayor Martini noted that there was a request for public comment on this item; however, this was not a public hearing. He asked if the Council wished to hear the public comment. Council Member Carrigan asked for an opinion from the City Attorney as to whether or not the Council should allow the person to make comments, due to pending litigation. City Attorney Adams noted that the Council rules were clear that anyone wanting to make a comment about any item on the agenda needed to make them under public comment. He said he has repeatedly advised the Council not to discuss on-going litigation about any matter and that holds true for this item, as well. He said if the Council wanted to hear the comments, they should not engage in a discussion with the maker of those comments. Council Member Ratti said she felt there were two issues involved. One is the ratification of the Purchasing Manager’s action and the other is clarification as to whether we have clearly delegated the authority to the Purchasing Manager to reject bids. City Attorney Adams stated we could certainly amend our existing policies to reflect the current practice. Ms. Ratti said she would like to hear comments from Mr. Daly.


Page 7 of 9

Council Member Salerno said he had no problem with hearing public comment. Council Member Smith said Mr. Daly called his home twice; however, he did not talk to him, per the City Attorney’s Advice. Therefore, he did not wish to hear Mr. Daly’s comments. Council Member Schmitt said that he felt Mr. Daly was deliberate in turning in his request to speak to the City Clerk after public comment was closed. He has always been on the side of hearing public comment; however, he did not believe that Mr. Daly has been above board in his conduct regarding this issue. But, despite his prior actions, he would like to give Mr. Daly an opportunity to speak. Council Member Carrigan noted he agreed with Mr. Schmitt and that he would do his best not to engage in discussion with Mr. Daly. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to allow public comment. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, NO. Motion carried. Mr. Richard Daly stated he misunderstood the rules and thought he was supposed to speak under the item. He said the issue of whether or not the Purchasing Manager could reject bids once they were received was made clear under NRS 338.1385(6)—once they are received they can only be rejected by the public body or their authorized representative. The representative in this case, the Purchasing Manager or City Manger, are only authorized to act as representative for up to $25,000 for purposes of award. This was how he interpreted the law. He said it does not seem sensible to reject bids that would cost the city half a million dollars more when the project was re-bid. Council Member Schmitt asked for a “transcript” of Mr. Daly’s comments, stating if he heard right, Mr. Daly called our courts incompetent and negligent. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to ratify the actions taken by the City of Sparks Purchasing Manager in the June 9, 2009 rejection of all bids specific to Bid No. 08/09-028. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.4 Discussion, consideration and possible approval of a Memorandum of

Understanding with Operating Engineers Local 3 Non-Supervisory Unit This item was pulled from the Agenda.

6.5 Discussion, consideration and possible approval of a Memorandum of

Understanding with Operating Engineers Local 3 Supervisory Unit This item was pulled from the Agenda.

6.6 Presentation and possible direction from Council regarding implementation of the Truckee Meadows Regional Drainage Manual (TMRDM) (Time: 4:04:57 p.m.)

Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas noted that the latest edition of the Hydraulic Criteria and Drainage Manual, now titled Truckee Meadows Regional Drainage Manual, is now complete and


Page 8 of 9

the City is prepared to implement its use for development projects within the City of Sparks. The purpose of the manual is to provide minimum standards for flood control and drainage components within Reno, Sparks, and unincorporated Washoe County. It is a common reference for policies and criteria relating to drainage design and hydrology for the three entities and will ensure consistency in analysis, planning, and design. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to direct staff to implement the Truckee Meadows Regional Drainage Manual as outlined by Staff for development projects within the City of Sparks. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.7 Consideration and possible authorization for the Mayor to sign a Grant

Program Contract to Award the Fire Department $3,756 for 90 Nerve Agent Antidote Kits (Time: 4:09:26 p.m.)

Fire Chief Andy Flock noted that the City was awarded this grant as part of the Local Emergency Planning Agency’s grant process. The materials acquired under the grant will be used to support preparedness goals in hazardous materials incidents. Mayor Martini asked under what circumstances these kits would be used. Chief Flock stated these kits are typically used to treat organophosphates (which are considered a chemical), a weapon of mass destruction, and a number of pesticides. He asked if these were for staff or the public. Chief Flock stated that they would be used by the first responders so that they could continue doing their job in the event of an exposure. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to authorize the Mayor to sign the Grant Program Contract. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.8 First Reading and possible discussion of Bill No. 2607, PCN08062 - a

proposed Rezoning by the City of Sparks for property within the Transit Oriented Development boundary. These lands are generally located south of Oddie Boulevard, and Prater Way, north of Interstate 80, east of the City line with Reno and west of Vista Boulevard.

-rezoning proposal to change zoning within the Transit Oriented Development boundary from C1 (Neighborhood Commercial), C2 (General Commercial), C2/R (General Commercial-Redevelopment Overlay), C2/TOD (General Commercial/Transit Oriented Development Overlay), C2/TR (General Commercial/Mobile Home Overlay), I (Industrial), PF (Public Facility), PO (Professional Office), R1-15 (Single Family Residential), R1-9 (Single Family Residential), R1-6 (Single Family Residential), R-2 (Multiple Family Residential), R2-PUD (Multiple Family, Planned Unit Development), R3 (Multiple Family Residential), R3-PUD (Multiple Family Residential/Planned Unit Development), R4 (Multiple Family Residential), R4/PUD (Multiple Family Residential/Planned Unit Development), R5 (Multiple Family Residential), R5/PUD (Multiple Family Residential/Planned Unit Development), TC (Tourist Commercial), and TC/TOD (Tourist Commercial/Transit Oriented Development


Page 9 of 9

Overlay) to TOD (Transit Oriented Development). Zoning Designations with TR (Mobile Home Overlay) will have the TR (Mobile Home Overlay) applied to the TOD zoning. Zoning Designations with the R (Redevelopment Overlay) will have the R (Redevelopment Overlay) applied to the TOD zoning. Zoning with the TS (Time Share) overlay will have the TS (Time Share) applied to the TOD zoning. (Time: 4:11:20 p.m.)

City Clerk Linda Patterson read Bill No. 2607, by title. Mayor Martini announced that the second reading and public hearing for this bill would be held at the regular city council meeting scheduled for July 27, 2009. 6.9 First Reading and possible discussion of Bill No. 2608, PCN08062 - A

Proposed Code Amendment by the City of Sparks for property within the Transit Oriented Development Boundary. These lands are generally located south of Oddie Boulevard and Prater Way, north of Interstate 80, east of the City line with Reno and west of Vista Boulevard.

- Code Amendment to amend the existing Transit Oriented Development Standards with revised Transit Oriented Development Standards. (Time: 4:13:01 p.m.)

City Clerk Linda Patterson read Bill No. 2608, by title. Mayor Martini announced that the second reading and public hearing for this bill would be held at the regular city council meeting scheduled for July 27, 2009. 7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: (Time:

4:13:23 p.m.) None. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items: (Time: 4:13:23 p.m.) None. 9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 4:13:23 p.m.) Council Member Carrigan asked for clarification on the TOD matrix provided in the staff report for the TOD ordinance regarding what uses are allowed under the mixed use designation.


Page 1 of 19

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 3:00 P.M. Monday, July 27, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:00 p.m. 2. *Roll Call Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Invocation Speaker: The invocation was given by Pastor Shea Hicks of the First Baptist Church of Sparks. Pledge of Allegiance The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Julia Ratti. *Comments from the Public (*Time: 3:04:12 p.m.) Ms. Shirley Bertschinger spoke in opposition to the proposed Master Plan Amendment for the Tierra Del Sol Development (6.7). Ms. Jeanie Adams, 5655 Grasswood Drive, Sparks, spoke in opposition to the casino project, citing concerns regarding an increase in crime that comes from having casinos in neighborhood areas. Mr. David Lohen asked for the swimming hours to be extended at the Marina so that working families can have time to play after work. It now closes at 6:00 p.m., which does not allow him time to take his family swimming after work. He suggested that if the budget would not allow for extended hours due to costs for life guards, that a sign be posted that allowed people to “swim at their own risk.” Parks and Recreation Director Stan Sherer noted that the limited hours of operation for swimming at the Marina are strictly budgetary… we just don’t have the funds. He pointed out that the pools and the Marina were going to close this summer because of funding; however, the Council was able to come up with funds outside the Parks and Recreation budget which allowed them to remain open. He also noted that the number of lifeguards is set by the Washoe County Health Department based on the square footage of beach area and that once improvements are made to a swim area, it must have lifeguards and unfortunately, no swimming can be allowed without the life guards. (*The recorder was not turned on until 3:04 p.m.) Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:15:07 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists.

Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting for July 27, 2009

Page 2 of 19

Item 6.2 was pulled from the agenda. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: 3.1 The regular meeting of July 13, 2009 (Time: 3:15:53 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 13, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Presentation of Nevada League of Cities Award to Danae Moser (Time: 3:16:21 p.m.) Mayor Martini presented Ms. Moser with a plaque in recognition of her achievement as a runner-up in the High School – Metro category of the competition.

4.2 Introduction of Zach Bankston, Volunteer Intern (Time: 3:19:30 p.m.)

Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll introduced Mr. Zach Bankston, who is a volunteer intern in the city’s Administrative Services Department. He is working on his doctorate at the University of Nevada, Reno. He will be with us for the next semester to learn how government works and how people have input into their government. 5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:21:07 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Consent Items 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


transfers for the period June 25, 2009, through July 8, 2009 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.


for The Verdandi, LLC, dba Sidelines Bar & Nightclub, located at 1237 Baring Boulevard, Sparks, NV, Submitted by Mr. David Robert Pennington

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for a Gaming License for the sidelines Bar and Nightclub. The license will provide a $1,800.00 annual fee for 15 multi-denominational, bar-top slot machines; contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.

5.3 Consideration and possible award of Bid #08/09-036 for Sierra Chemical to

supply the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility with Sodium Hypochlorite for the annual amount of $710,000

An agenda item from Senior Administrative Analyst Gary Hutchinson recommending a bid award for supplying Sodium Hypochlorite to the water treatment plant. This chemical is used to


Page 3 of 19

disinfect plant effluent prior to reuse or disposal. This bid represents a decrease of almost 10 cents in the cost per gallon from the previous supplier. The contract is from July 1, 1009 through December 31, 2009, with the possibility of 19 six-month term renewals through June 30, 2019, with pricing being evaluated every six months. Funds are budgeted for this expense.


6.1 Presentation, discussion and possible direction or approval of Federal, State, Nevada League of Cities, and Local Legislative Affairs issues. Presentation of the 2009 Legislative Session (Time: 3:21:40 p.m.)

Government Affairs Manager Rob Joiner and Government Affairs Analyst Kathy Clewett provided a power point summary of the 2009 Legislative Session and discussed the effect the results of the session had on the city of Sparks. He also reviewed the special interim study committees that will be meeting during the interim between now and the 2011 Legislative session. 2009 LEGISLATIVE SESSION ‐ Government Affairs Team ANALYSIS OF SESSION

City Government Redevelopment/Economic Development Health/Risk Benefits/PERS/PEBP Public Works/Transportation Bills Tracked but not Enacted Renewable Energy/Sustainability/Abatements and Incentives General Government and Fiscal Impacts Studies/Interim Session 2011 Session Conclusion

CITY GOVERNMENT AB 79: Changes City Election Rules ‐NLC sponsored AB 86: Allows local government to impose new tax/fee upon voter approval –NLC sponsored (Died) AB 97: Unfunded mandate requirement weakened to notification ‐NLC sponsored AB 233: Requires Registration of Dealers and Better Record Keeping AB 304: Preserves and Improves Existing Neighborhoods (Washoe County exempted) SB 59: Revises Provisions Governing Telephone Systems (Washoe County Enhanced 911 bill) SB 162: Revises the Primary Election Date to June SB 175: Washoe County Flood Control SB 267: Open Meeting Law for Workshops and Hearings SB 429: Omnibus State Bill

REDEVELOPMENT/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AB 74: Tentative and Final Maps Revisions and Extensions AB 146: Establishes a State Business Portal AB 149: Mortgage Foreclosure Reform AB 304: Neighborhood Preservation that are over 40 Years of Age (Washoe County Exempted) AB 422: STAR Bonds (died) AB 458: Redirect Redevelopment Funding for Schools (died) AB 492: Limits Local and State Government Agencies’ use of Tax Abatements and Exemptions SB 248: Authorizes the Extension of Certain Building Permits and Development Agreements SB 429: Modified Business Tax (MBT)

HEALTH/RISK BENEFITS/PERS/PEBP AB 173: Occupational Disease Coverage AB 243: Grants leave to employees AB 281: Workers Compensation AB 521: Increases Coverage of Occupational Diseases of Firefighters SB 87: Health Benefits Provided by a Local Government (died)


Page 4 of 19

SB 195: Revises Provisions for Workers Compensation SB 415: Revises Maximum Amounts to be Paid to PEBP SB 427: Changes Retirement Ages and Payments for New Hires to PERS SB 433: Furloughs for State Workers/Payments for State and Local into PEBP/PERS

PUBLIC WORKS/TRANSPORTATION AB 54: Allows Washoe County to Provide Monetary Assistance to Connect to County Sewer and Provide

Assistance for Flood Mitigation AB 80: Sewer Laterals –NLC sponsored AB 223: Bidding Preferences AB 467: Prevailing Wage/Purchase Agreement Requirements AB 503: Highway Funding (Died) SB 201: RTC 5 ‐Washoe County sponsored

BILLS TRACKED BUT NOT ENACTED AB 30: Revises Abatements from the Economic Development Commission AB 31: Revises Certain Powers of County Governments AB 32: Provides that no Governmental Agency be Required to Mark Certain Sewer Laterals AB 45: Makes Changes to Provisions Governing Public Defenders AB 66: Registration of Vacant Dwellings and Buildings (CoR) AB 67: Levy Ad Valorem Tax to Pay for Public Safety/Health/Welfare AB 86: Allows Local Governments to Impose a Voter Approved Tax (NLC) AB 98: City of Sparks Room Tax AB 119: Comprehensive Regional Plan and Sustainability of Water Resources AB 147: Bidding Preferences on Certain Contracts AB 397: Authorize Redevelopment Agencies to Spend Money on Schools AB 442: Revises Provisions Governing Lobbying AB 443: Revises Election of Councilmen in Reno and Sparks AB 504: Allows for Automated Traffic Devices (Red Light Cameras) AB 511: Industrial Insurance and 3rdParty Administrators AB 541: Tax on Transient Lodging AB 551: Video Franchise Fees SB 32: Makes Changes to the Open Meeting Law SB 88: Revises the Formula for the Allocation in Washoe County of Money Distributed from the Local

Government Tax Distribution Account (CoR‐withdrawn) SB 95: Imposition of Property Tax in Unincorporated Washoe County (CoR) SB 116: Seat Belt as a Primary Offense SB 206: Toll Roads SB 210: Changes Provisions Governing Disposition/Reporting of Campaign Contributions SB 213: Sparks Charter Bill SB 224: Revises Provisions Concerning Voting by Members of Certain Public Bodies SB 294: Interim Study on CTAX SB 301: Various Changes Relating to Military Installations SB 311: Fluoridation of Water in Washoe County SB 354: Appeal of Land Use Decisions SB 375: Establishes the Commission on Intergovernmental Relations SB 399: Interim Study on Existing Taxes SB 432: Creates the Stabilization and Advancement Commission SCR 38: Interim Study on Community Redevelopment

RENEWABLE ENERGY/SUSTAINABILITY/ABATEMENTS ANDINCENTIVES AB 186: Changes the Definition of a Public Utility to Exclude Renewable Energy Systems Dedicated to a Single

Customer AB 192: Changes NRS 332: Local Purchasing as it Applies to Performance Contracting SB 73: Requires Local Government Abatement of Property Taxes for Energy Conserving Uses SB 358: Creates a New State Agency with Powers to Create Incentives SB 395: Requires Commission on Economic Development and the Public Utility Commission to Develop New

Energy Consumption and Renewable Energy Standards for New Development GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND FISCAL IMPACTS

Known impact:


Page 5 of 19

o AB 540: Charge up to $10/Employee for the LGEMRB; $10K o AB 543: Take 4 cents from Washoe/Clark County property tax rate and Remainder of Local Government’s

Capital Improvement Plan Funding; $467K o AB 552: Increase the States Collection fee from .75% to 1.75%; $175K o SB 201: Provides Increase in Fuel Tax for Washoe County Road Projects (RTC 5)

Unknown impact: o AB 162: Health care plans provide coverage for autism o AB 173: Arson investigators receive new health benefits o AB 353: Enables Local Governments to Assess and Collect Fines for Certain Crimes o AB 521: Increases Coverage of Occupational Diseases of Firefighters o AB 548: Revises Provisions to Allow Certain Government Entities to Accept Credit Card Payments o SB 276: Changes Land Sales Agreements and Real Property Transfer Tax

STUDIES/INTERIM SESSION STUDIES

o AB 9: Creates the Committee on Senior Citizens, Veterans, and Adults with Special Needs o AB 494: Study on Consolidation for Local Governments (Washoe and Clark Counties) o ACR 2: Study on the Governance and Oversight of the System of Public Education o ACR 19: Study the Requirements for Reapportionment/Redistricting o ACR 30: Study of the Infrastructure and Transportation in the State o SB 3: Creates the Committee on Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice o SB 264: Study on Local Government Authority o SB 432: Study on Economic, Fiscal, and Long Term Needs of the State. (Died) o SCR 19: Study on the Production and Use of Energy in the State o SCR 26: Study on Employee Misclassifications o SCR 37: Conduct a Review of Nevada’s Revenue Structure o SCR 39: Study on Costs and Payments for Medical Services

INTERIM SESSION o Development and Promotion of Logistics and Distribution Centers and Issues Concerning Infrastructure and

Transportation (ACR 30) o Employee Misclassifications (SCR 26) o Governance and Oversight of the System K‐12 Public Education (ACR 2) o Group Homes (AB 294) o Powers Delegated to Local Governments (SB 264) (Includes provisions from SB 294, Local Authority) o Production and Use of Energy (SCR 19) o Requirements for Reapportionment/Redistricting (ACR 19)

STATUTORYCOMMITTEES Advisory Commission on the Administration of Justice Advisory Commission on the Administration of Justice Advisory Commission on the Administration of Justice Commission on Special License Plates Committee on High‐Level Radioactive Waste Committee on Industrial Programs Committee to Consult with the Director Interim Retirement and Benefits Committee Legislative Commission’s Audit Subcommittee Legislative Commission’s Subcommittee to Review Regulations Legislative Committee for the Review and Oversight of the Tahoe RPA and the Marlette Lake Water System Legislative Committee on Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice Legislative Committee on Education Legislative Committee on Health Care Legislative Committee on Public Lands Legislative Committee on Senior Citizens, Veterans and Adults with Special Needs Legislative Committee to Oversee the Western Regional Water Commission

2011 SESSION Reapportionment/Redistricting State/Local Revenue Restructuring Health Care Funding Education Funding


Page 6 of 19

STAR Bonds PERS/PEBP Redevelopment/Economic Development Local Authority

CONCLUSION

Council Member Schmitt pointed out that each new standing committee set up by the Legislature this session costs lots of money. He also commented that the Legislature decreased Sparks’ revenues (used to provide services to our citizens) by over $635,000 with their actions this year.

6.2 Consideration and possible approval of Resolution No. 3148; directing the City's Finance Director to establish, as necessary, a non-interest bearing short-term inter-fund loan not to exceed $750,000 to the Sparks Redevelopment Agency #1 Revolving Fund; and Resolution No. 3149; directing the City’s Finance Director to establish, as necessary, a non-interest bearing short-term inter-fund loan not to exceed $500,000 to the City of Sparks Victorian Square Room Tax Fund. Both loans will originate from the City of Sparks General Fund in accordance to NAC 350.150, as necessary to implement certain capital improvements for the Sparks Redevelopment Area #1, and pay off the Victorian Square Room Tax Fund's existing credit facility that was established in 2004 and becomes fully due in October 2009 (Time: 3:44:02 p.m.)

This item was pulled from the agenda. 6.3 Consideration and possible approval of a contract for construction of the

Spanish Springs Sanitary Sewer Phase 3b, 3c, and 4 Project (Federally Funded), Bid No. 09/10-002, PWP No. WA-2009-315, to Reno Tahoe Construction, Inc., in the amount of $6,699,554.50 (Time: 3:44:02 p.m.)

Civil Engineer Andy Hummel noted this was the final phase of a multi-phase project to construct a replacement and new parallel sewer interceptor to serve the Spanish Springs basins. Portions of this project are within areas of Vista Boulevard, which is scheduled to be widened by the Regional Transportation Commission. He stated that the total footage for the project is just under 25,000 linear foot of sanitary sewer piping, ranging from 24 inches to 54 inches in diameter. The contract for the project has 250 working days. Portions of Phase 4 are expedited and must be completed by September 30th in order to accommodate the RTC project for widening portions of Vista Boulevard. Mr. Hummel noted that there were 7 bidders with Reno Tahoe Construction being the lowest bidder. Council Member Schmitt noted that this project was re-bid. He asked how many bidders there were the first time this project was bid. Mr. Hummel stated the first time there were 10 bids, but this time there were only 7. Mr. Schmitt asked if the companies that did not re-bid offered any explanation. Mr. Hummel stated they did not; however, all three of those companies were the higher bidders the first time around. Mr. Schmitt expressed concern regarding the 10% force account. He asked that, due to all the controversy and bad press regarding this project, staff bring all change orders for this project to the Council for review, even if the change orders are a normal part of construction. He emphasized he did not want to delay the project, but he did want to be able to review the change orders, just to make sure the project is on track and that the funds are being spent wisely.


Page 7 of 19

Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb stated that the City typically has a 5 to 10 percent force account on our projects to handle unexpected issues. Staff is very confident that Reno Tahoe Construction can do this job; however, because most of this project is underground, we typically find things we don’t expect when we start to dig. He said he would provide monthly updates on this project to the Council. Council Member Smith asked questions regarding the timing of the project. Mr. Hummel provided specifics regarding when construction is supposed to start and the anticipated interface with the RTC project on Vista Boulevard. Council Member Salerno expressed concern that the Council oversight requested by Mr. Schmitt did not delay the project in any way. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the contract for construction of the Spanish Springs Sanitary Sewer Phase 3b, 3c, and 4 Project (Federally Funded), Bid No. 09/10-002, PWP No. WA-2009-315, to Reno Tahoe Construction, Inc., in the amount of $6,699,554.50. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.4 Consideration and possible approval of Resolution No. 3150, a Resolution

adopting a Red Flag Policy and Establishing an Identity Theft Prevention Program (Time: 3:53:04 p.m.)

Senior Assistant City Attorney Wendy Chavez stated this resolution is a result of the FTC passing new regulations. She stated that although the City is not typically thought of as a creditor, because of the broad definitions in the regulations our sewer department qualifies because we take on-going payments. The new regulations require the City to develop a policy retarding identity theft.

A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve Resolution No. 3150, a resolution adopting a Red Flag Policy and Establishing an Identity Theft Prevention Program. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.5 Performance review by the City Council of City Manager Shaun Carey to

consider the character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or mental health of the city manager and/or consideration and possible approval of a merit increase and/or an extension of Employment Agreement through 7/31/2011 (Time: 3:55:12 p.m.)

An agenda item from Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson recommending that the City Council review the performance of the City Manager as outlined in his employment agreement. The Mayor and Council Members were requested to provide performance feedback. Feedback was also solicited from several senior staff members. Council is asked to review the performance results and vote on whether or not to extend the City Manager’s employment contract.


Page 8 of 19

City Manager Shaun Carey noted that Ms. Syverson is ill and unable to attend this meeting; therefore he would be facilitating this agenda item. He noted that the comments and areas of improvement recommended are very important to him because they outline where he can improve over the next year in his service to the City. He noted that he is currently working with Senior Staff to update the goals and objectives for the coming year and a Council retreat is scheduled for August 31st to review those goals, etc. Mr. Carey thanked all of the employees of the City of Sparks, stating the financial situation we have faced in the last two years are unprecedented this City and we would not have had the ability to see us through this financial crisis without a great deal of sacrifice from a lot of employees. He said we have had to face a lot of tough choices and in the coming year we face even greater challenges. Mr. Carey emphasized that he is not seeking to increase his salary and, in fact, he has decreased his salary by 4.25% since December of last year and he will continue with this reduction in the coming year. However, he is asking that they Council continue his employment agreement for a two year period, ending July 31, 2011. Council Member Smith thanked Mr. Carey for the excellent job Mr. Carey has done as City Manager over the past two years that Mr. Smith has served as a council person. Council Member Schmitt stated it was very evident from the evaluations received that the majority of the Council and staff are in support of Mr. Carey. He said Mr. Carey has successfully addressed the concerns of the council as expressed last year and he is in support of extending Mr. Carey’s employment contract. Council Member Carrigan stated it is easy to lead during good times, but leadership skills really shine during difficult times and he thanked Mr. Carey for the good job he had done during these difficult economic times. He said we have weathered the recent economic times fairly well, but they are going to get harder, so we need to “buckle up.” Mayor Martini said it is hard to see friends loose their jobs, but this is only the beginning of the tough times we are going to have over the next few years. Having Mr. Carey as our leader is going to be very beneficial for the City during these difficult economic times. Council Member Ratti stated that, as the newest member of the City Council, she has felt supported by Mr. Carey and he has given her the information she needed to make some very tough decisions. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve an extension of the City Manager’s Employment Agreement (A-3121) through July 31, 2011. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.6 First Reading and possible discussion of Bill No. 2609, an ordinance

amending the Sparks Municipal code by ELIMINATING THE REQUIREMENT THAT AN INDIVIDUAL HAVE ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE THAT A PERSON IS UNDER THE AGE OF 21 TO VIOLATE A CRIMINAL CODE SECTION PROHIBITING THE SALE OR FURNISHING OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES TO A PERSON


Page 9 of 19

UNDER THE AGE OF 21; and providing other matters properly relating thereto (Time: 4:01:28 p.m.)

City Clerk Linda Patterson read the bill by title. Mayor Martini announced that the second reading and public hearing on this bill would be held at the regular city council meeting of August 10, 2009. Mayor Martini allowed public comment as follows: Mr. Tray Abney, Reno Sparks Chamber of Commerce, 1 E. 1st Street, Reno, stated he supports the “sting” operations by the Police Department to crack down on any business owner or clerk who takes no effort, what-so-ever, to make sure that minors are not given or sold alcohol. However, he is concerned the proposed ordinance and how it would affect those store owners who did make an effort to stops minors from buying alcohol. Council Member Smith stated that as a member of the retail establishment he did not want to see more pressure put on checkers; however, the problem is that sometimes they don’t check for ID, and that is where the problem lies. He said he would like to see them have to take a class to learn how to check for ID’s. Ms. Lea Tauchen, Retail Association of Nevada, 410 S. Minnesota Street, Carson City, NV, also expressed concern regarding the language of the ordinance. City Attorney Adams suggested putting Mr. Abney’s concerns into the ordinance and letting the City Council decide what to adopt.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: (Time: 4:08:11 p.m.)

None. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items: 8.1 Public Hearing, consideration and possible action on PCN08062:

A. Resolution No. 3152, a Resolution for a Master Plan Amendment from the City of Sparks to change the boundary of the Transit Oriented Development Corridor; change the land use designations for all sites within the Transit Oriented Development Corridor from the existing land use designations of all General Commercial, General Commercial/ Industrial, General Commercial/High Density Residential, Industrial, Low Density Residential, Low Medium Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Mixed Use, Office Professional, Office Professional/Industrial, Public Facility, Tourist Commercial, and Tourist Commercial/General Commercial and replace with Residential Neighborhood, Mixed Use Residential, Civic, Downtown Victorian Square, Mixed Use Commercial, Employment Center; define a Downtown Center (Victorian Square); and remove the existing Transit Oriented Development Plan, Prater “B” Sparks High Plan, and Marina


Page 10 of 19

Area Plan, replacing them with a revised Transit Oriented Development Plan; and,

B. Public Hearing, Second Reading and possible approval Bill No. 2607, - an ordinance for a rezoning by the City of Sparks to change zoning on approximately 2,360 acres, generally located south of Oddie Boulevard, and Prater Way, north of Interstate 80, east of the City line with Reno and west of Vista Boulevard, from C1 (Neighborhood Commercial), C2 (General Commercial), C2/R (General Commercial-Redevelopment Overlay), C2/ TOD (General Commercial/Transit Oriented Development Overlay), C2/TR (General Commercial/Mobile Home Overlay), I (Industrial), PF (Public Facility), PO (Professional Office), R1-15 (Single Family Residential), R1-9 (Single Family Residential), R1-6 (Single Family Residential), R-2 (Multiple Family Residential), R2-PUD (Multiple Family, Planned Unit Development), R3 (Multiple Family Residential), R3-PUD (Multiple Family Residential/ Planned Unit Development), R4 (Multiple Family Residential), R4/PUD (Multiple Family Residential/Planned Unit Development), R5 (Multiple Family Residential), R5/PUD (Multiple Family Residential/Planned Unit Development), TC (Tourist Commercial), and TC/TOD (Tourist Commercial/Transit Oriented Development Overlay) to TOD (Transit Oriented Development). Zoning Designations with TR (Mobile Home Overlay) will have the TR (Mobile Home Overlay) applied to the TOD zoning. Zoning Designations with the R (Redevelopment Overlay) will have the R (Redevelopment Overlay) applied to the TOD zoning. Zoning with the TS (Time Share) overlay will have the TS (Time Share) applied to the TOD zoning. (Time: 4:08:11 p.m.)

Council Member Schmitt noted that he had a client that was working on developing property within the TOD corridor and, while he had not yet been paid for any work by the client on his project, he would be abstaining on this item because of the potential for a conflict of interest. Assistant City Manger Randy Mellinger reviewed the evolution of this ordinance and the development of the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) concept over the past 12 years. He also commended the efforts of staff, consultants, members of the community, developers, and other entities in making this planning goal a reality. Senior Planner Jim Rundle explained that these two items, a Master Plan amendment and zoning proposal, and the next item, a ordinance amending the TOD Standards, are all for the Transit Oriented Development corridor in the City of Sparks. He noted that both 8.1 and 8.2 would be presented together (with separate votes) and he then displayed a map of the affected area. He stated that ultimately this process will promote reinvestment in the core area of Sparks by allowing for higher densities which are neighborhood sensitive while providing for “walkability” and utilization of the transit system. The Sparks Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval. The Master Plan has already been found in conformance with the


Page 11 of 19

Regional Plan at their June meeting. The proposal was reviewed by the Regional Planning commission so the Sparks Council could review the proposal as a whole (Master Plan amendment, Rezoning, and Code Amendment). Council Member Smith asked for clarification, stating the Regional Plan calls for higher densities than our plan, yet we are in conformance with the Regional Plan. Mr. Rundle explained that the Regional Plan does not call for higher densities than we are proposing; it calls for high average densities than we are proposing. For example, we have essentially designated Victorian Square as the downtown center and we are complying with the minimum density the Regional Plan requires. Along the corridors, it requires that there be a minimum density of 30 dwelling units per acre along Victorian and Prater. However, for the entire TOD, which is the area outlined on the map in the staff report, it requires an average density of 30 dwelling units per acre. There are areas that are residential and we are not requiring the minimum average densities to be 30—we have dropped those densities down because we don’t believe in this economic climate we don’t believe it is appropriate to be requiring those minimum densities. We are also concerned about fitting those minimum densities into the context of those existing neighborhoods. What the Regional Plan says is that if you have an intensification plan, you can drop below minimum required densities. We have included an intensification plan in our master plan that says over time (the next five years) we will evaluate what we have to see how it is working with the Regional Plan. Mr. Rundle noted a memo that was sent to the Council which was not included in the staff report regarding proposed changes to the Plan. No. 3 – Permitted/Prohibited Uses. Council Members Smith and Carrigan asked questions regarding how gaming would fit into the permitted uses in the TOD area. Mr. Rundle clarified that staff’s recommendation is to only allow gaming via a special use permit application. Discussion ensued regarding allowing unrestricted gaming as an allowed use in mixed use areas versus allowing gaming within residential areas of the TOD area. The intent is to have unrestricted gaming in the matrix as allowed by special use permit only in mixed use areas. Council Member Ratti noted that she had asked discussion because she felt that this change represented a significant expansion of the allowable areas for non-restricted gaming. She said she did not feel we should be expanding it into the residential areas of the TOD corridor. She asked Mr. Rundle to show what was allowed in the previous zoning. Mr. Rundle noted that unrestricted gaming is allowed in the TC (Tourist Commercial) areas and Council is being asked whether or not they want to allow unrestricted gaming in other areas, with a special use permit. Council Member Carrigan pointed out that with the new zoning, restricted gaming would be allowed in the same areas that it is currently allowed (in bars, restaurants, entertainment facilities, health clubs, etc.). The only difference is the table games and 200 hotel rooms. The argument is: If you are going to have gaming in your neighborhood, what is the difference between a bar next to a residential neighborhood that has gaming (restricted) and a bar that has gaming and hotel rooms (unrestricted)? Mr. Rundle said the proposed matrix would allow restricted gaming everywhere but in the residential neighborhood and the employment area.


Page 12 of 19

Council Member Ratti stated she did want to see unrestricted gaming allowed in mixed residential areas, even with a special use permit because she sees it as a significant expansion of gaming into residential neighborhoods. Mr. Rundle pointed out on the map the mixed residential areas where Council Member Ratti was proposing to not allow gaming. It was noted that this would not affect areas where unrestricted gaming is already allowed (Legends project). Mr. Rundle requested that the council provide direction to staff as to what policy they wanted to set for the restricted, unrestricted gaming areas. Mr. Rundle then reviewed the other comments in the memo as follows: No. 1 - BRT – this is the yellow line that runs along Prater to Vista; along Lincoln to Victorian, and then back to Prater. If the property is located within these designations, then you are allowed a higher density for development. Staff is recommending that if the property is within 400 feet of the BRT, you should be able to use the incentives that only the parcels directly on the BRT received before. This would allow more density and reduced considerations for parking and landscape. No. 2 – there is a sentence on page 10 of the residential district that refers to a historic area (that the Council discussed that the workshop) which is not appropriate since we do not have a Historic Commission and a historic ordinance has not bee completed. Staff believes that it is appropriate to remove that section at this time, until we can further the historic preservation effort. No. 3 – will add animal shelters and adult day care as permitted uses in certain districts. Animal shelter will be permitted in the employment land use category. This is shown in blue, just east of Sparks Boulevard. No. 4 – Minimum Landscape Requirements. If Council chooses to allow the expansion of the definition of “adjacent to the BRT” – this would allow parcels within 400 feet of the BRT to utilize the incentives of landscaping and parking. No. 5 – Applicability section. Clarification that existing buildings would use the current zoning standards table; however, they would not receive the parking or landscaping reduction unless they did a project that made it a TOD project. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed Master Plan Amendment, the rezoning, or the ordinance. Mr. Jeff Dold spoke regarding his desire to open an adult day care business and how the proposed changes would allow him to open that business in Sparks. Mr. Michael Pagni, McDonald Carano, Wilson representing Sierra Investments, LLC, spoke in support of the plan, with the changes that have been made. Mr. Harvey Whittimore, on behalf of Western Village and Peppermill Partners, asked for


Page 13 of 19

clarification, for the record, that it is not intent of the land use framework to address the NSSOI issues under this TOD Resolution and Ordinance. He also expressed concern regarding Council Member Ratti’s request that the City address the issue of the locations in which gaming is allowed in the City from a policy perspective. He wanted assurance that the institutions that already have non-restricted gaming are “grandfathered in” for their locations, so there is no attempt to create nonconforming uses for those existing non-restricted gaming licenses. Mr. Rundle clarified that the two issues referred to by Mr. Whittemore have nothing to do with north Sparks. The proposed changes only affect the corridor that bounds the TOD and it would not affect the NSSOI plan. He said that if there is an existing gaming license in an active casino, this TOD does not remove the ability for the use; just as it would not remove the ability for a single-family residential on a parcel in downtown Victorian Square… they are all grandfathered in. However, if there was a renovation which is greater than 50% of the square footage of the existing floor, then the project have to comply with the new standards. There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed. Council Member Ratti asked if the historical preservation language was being left in the Master Plan, but being taken out of the design elements. Mr. Rundle confirmed this statement, saying it is still the intent of the City to review and initiate moving forward with a historic committee or district, but it should not be a zoning standard when we don’t have anything to relate it to. Council Member Ratti expressed concern that the area designed in the amendment is not necessarily aligned with the results of the historic assessments that we have been doing with the grant money from the State. She said she believed that at some point we would have to amend the Master Plan to designate the neighborhood that the assessments identified as the most critical historical resources for the City and that the neighborhood that is designated in this master plan may not be the correct neighborhood, since we don’t have the results of the assessment to make a determination at this time. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to adopt Resolution No. 3152, certifying the Planning Commission approval of the Master Plan amendments associated with PCN08062, adopting findings MP1 through MP4 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, ABSTAIN. Motion Carried. Council Member Ratti said she wanted to go on record as supporting the TOD corridor, but she would like to see the amendments that were just discussed incorporated. Mr. Rundle noted that this was the ordinance rezoning the parcels and that the appropriate place to approve the amendments to the TOD standards would be under Item 8.2. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve Bill No. 2607 (Ordinance No. 2427), the rezoning request associated with PCN08062 to rezone approximately 2360 acres to TOD (Transit Oriented Development) based on findings Z1 through Z3 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, ABSTAIN. Motion Carried.


Page 14 of 19

8.2 Public Hearing, Second Reading and possible approval of PCN08062, Bill No. 2608, - an ordinance amending the existing the existing Transit Oriented Development Standards with revised Transit Oriented Development Standards by the City of Sparks for property within the Transit Oriented Development Boundary. These lands are generally located south of Oddie Boulevard and Prater Way, north of Interstate 80, east of the City line with Reno and west of Vista Boulevard (Time: 4:52:04 p.m.)

Senior Planner Jim Rundle explained that this item includes an amendment to Title 20 of the Sparks Municipal Code to change the existing Transit Oriented Development standards. amendment to Title 20 of for the Transit Oriented Development corridor in the City of Sparks. Ultimately this process (Master Plan amendment, Rezoning, and Code Amendment) will promote reinvestment in the core area of Sparks by allowing for higher densities which are neighborhood sensitive while providing for “walkability” and utilization of the transit system. The Council voted on each amendment as listed below: Amendment #1: Parcels within 400 feet of the BRT, essentially Prater and Victorian, would be able to utilize the higher densities and the incentives that were (prior to today) only allowed for parcels adjoining Victorian or Prater. Council Member Ratti asked to go on record as supporting this amendment. She said the density along the TOD corridor is what we are looking for. It also supports the neighborhood preservation aspect of the plan by pushing that density to the TOD corridors where the BRT where folks are closer to transit, while still maintaining the current neighborhood layout. Staff asked if the public hearing needed to be held prior to voting on the amendments. Acting City Attorney Doug Thornley stated that the public hearing did not need to be held prior to voting on the amendments, but it should be held prior to voting on the actual proposed ordinance. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Amendment #1 to Bill No. 2608 which includes the language within the proximity of the BRT and not within the proximity of the BRT, as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, ABSTAIN. Motion carried. Amendment #2: removes the reference to a specific historic district that is in the zoning standards, as requested at the last City Council Workshop. Council Member Ratti said she would support this amendment with the understanding that we re-invigorate our historic preservation efforts and start to make some meaningful decisions about historic preservation. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Amendment #2 to Bill No. 2608 to remove the historically designated neighborhood in the design requirements, as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, ABSTAIN. Motion carried.


Page 15 of 19

Amendment #3: Adds animal shelters and adult day care as permitted uses, with a special use permit, in mixed use and commercial land use categories. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve Amendment #3 to Bill No. 2608 to add animal shelters and adult day care with a special use permit, as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, ABSTAIN. Motion carried. Amendment #4: Whether non-restricted gaming should be allowed, by special use permit, in the mixed use commercial, the downtown Victorian Square area, and in mixed use residential zones. Council Member Carrigan asked what the difference was between mixed use residential and residential and what we were trying to accomplish by allowing non-restricted gaming in mixed use residential neighborhoods. The consultant responded that the mixed use residential designation is the higher density areas (multi-family) and also allows for some pockets for low-intensity commercial development along the transit corridors. Whereas, as the neighborhood designation is primarily the areas that are existing single-family development. Mixed use residential is to maintain a distinction between the areas of higher density. Council Member Carrigan stated that according to the land use categories in the TOD Standards Handbook, there are a lot of things that are not permitted in residential that are permitted in mixed residential. He asked Ms. Ratti if she had any objections to the other permitted uses or just non-restricted gaming. Ms. Ratti responded, just the non restricted gaming. Council Member Ratti said that in response to Mr. Whittemore’s concerns, she wanted to make it clear, for the record that this amendment is absolutely in no way related to the NSSOI. It is just a meaningful conversation, at a policy level, among the Council as to where we should have gaming. She felt it was important to discuss this because she did see allowing non-restricted gaming in mixed residential zoning areas as a significant expansion from where we currently allow non-restricted gaming. Council Member Carrigan said he felt that if we were going to remove non-restricted gaming as an allowed use (with a special use permit) from the mixed residential zoning category, then we may as will remove all the other uses as well. He said to him there was no difference between a restaurant or mini-mart with 15 slot machines in it and a casino. Mayor Martini said he felt that it was better to error on the side of allowing the Council decide something in the future, rather than go through the “rig-a-ma-role” of changing an ordinance. We should allow future Councils to make these decisions. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to not accept staff’s recommendation for Amendment #3.2, to Bill No. 2608 regarding restricting non-restricted gaming in mixed residential. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Ratti, NO. Council Member Schmitt, ABSTAIN. Motion carried.


Page 16 of 19

Amendment #5: You don’t get to use the TOD incentives unless you construct a TOD project. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Amendment #5 to Bill No. 2608 which states there will be no TOD incentives unless the development meets TOD project requirements, as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, ABSTAIN. Motion carried. Amendment #6: To have the fencing standards in the TOD the same as currently required. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Amendment #6 to Bill No. 2608 to have the same fencing standards for the TOD as currently zoned, as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, ABSTAIN. Motion carried. Mr. Rundle noted that this proposed ordinance will adopt the four design manuals that were previously reviewed and discussed by the Council. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone whished to speak regarding this proposed ordinance. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve Bill No. 2608 (Ordinance No. 2428) with all recommended Amendments, excluding Amendment #3.2., a code amendment to Title 20 of the Sparks Municipal Code associated with PCN08062 (CA-1-09). Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, ABSTAIN. Motion carried. Council Member Ratti requested that staff look into extending the rules for adult daycare city-wide—anywhere you can have child care you can have an adult daycare. She noted the County currently runs a medical adult daycare; however, there are folks who would benefit from a recreational adult daycare, but they can’t find placements because there are not enough facilities in our community. GENERAL BUSINESS CONTINUED 6.7 Discussion and possible action concerning Resolution No. 3151, approving

PCN09005, a proposed Master Plan Amendment request seeking: A. To change the land use designation from General Commercial (GC) to

Tourist Commercial (TC) on a site approximately 20.5 acres in size generally located east of Pyramid Highway, north of the Lazy 5 Park within the Tierra Del Sol Planned Development, Sparks, Nevada; and,

B. To change the land use designation from Tourist Commercial (TC) to 5 du/ac (dwelling units per acre), on a site approximately 27 acres in size generally located at the southwest corner of the intersection of vista Boulevard and Wingfield Hills Road in the Wingfield Springs Planned Development, Sparks, NV (Time: 5:08:14 p.m.)


Page 17 of 19

Council Member Salerno made a disclosure with regard to this item. “I am required to make the following disclosure under NRS 281A.420(4): My company, Nevada Form and Printing, does business with the Sparks Nugget on a bid/buy basis. The Nevada Commission on Ethics has determined that this relationship amounts to a commitment in a private capacity warranting disclosure and has further concluded that under the requirements of NRS 281a.420(4), I must abstain from voting on this item. The City Attorney’s Office has advised me that the Opinion of the Commission on Ethics is legally binding and that I am required to abstain from voting on this issue. I am hereby filing a written legal opinion from the City Attorney with the City Clerk.” Council Member Carrigan also made a disclosure regarding this item: “I am required to make the following disclosure under NRS 281A.420(4): Carlos Vasquez is a friend of min and has volunteered on each of my campaigns for City Council. Mr. Vasquez was, at one time, a paid representative for Red Hawk Land Company on this project, but he is no longer professionally associated with this project. The Nevada Commission on Ethics has determined that this relationship amounts to a commitment in a private capacity warranting disclosure and has further concluded that under the requirements of NRS 281a.420(4), I must abstain from voting on this item. The City Attorney’s Office has advised me that the Opinion of the Commission on Ethics is legally binding and that I am required to abstain from voting on this issue. I am hereby filing a written legal opinion from the City Attorney with the City Clerk.” Acting City Attorney Doug Thornley stated that based on the respective reasons obligating the abstentions of Council Members Carrigan and Salerno, the total membership of the Sparks City Council is reduced to three, as a matter of law, under NRS 281A.420(5). This reduction conforms with the requirements of NRS 241.0355(2) accordingly an affirmative vote of two members of the city council is required for this measure to pass. Mayor Martini disclosed that Mr. Carlos Vasquez also ran some of his campaigns and is also a friend of his. He will not be voting on this particular item, but he will be staying and running the meeting. Senior Planner Tim Thompson reviewed the history of this Master Plan Amendment request and stated that at this time, the City Council is being asked to either certify their previous action and approve this Master Plan Amendment or take the Planning Commission’s recommendation to take no action, which would effectively result in the final denial of this proposal. Mayor Martini noted that there were several requests to speak on this item, but it was not a public hearing item. However, with the indulgence of the Council, public comment would be allowed. Mayor Martini stated that some of the Planning Commissioners said in their report that they did not approve this request because of the “buffer” (between existing and proposed development). He asked if buffering is something we take into consideration under a Master Plan Amendment request. Mr. Thompson stated that he felt that what the Planning Commissioners were trying to suggest was more of a land use buffering, rather than a physical buffering. Typically physical buffering is discussed under the plan review process and is generally included in handbooks, special use permits, or site plan reviews. Land use buffering is more of a land use issue;


Page 18 of 19

however there are currently no regulations or policies that suggest that Tourist Commercial should be buffered by other types of land uses. Council Member Schmitt noted that the Council had been given a handout that appeared to be a legal letter from the Attorney for the Nugget. He asked if staff had an opportunity to review the letter. Acting City Attorney Thornley stated that legal staff has reviewed the faxed letter and they disagree with it in its entirety. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and the following persons spoke regarding the proposed Master Plan Amendment: Ms. Shirley Bertschinger spoke in opposition to the Master Plan Amendment. Mr. Harvey Whittemore spoke in support of the Master Plan Amendment. Council Member Ratti asked Mr. Whittemore if he intended to imply in his comments that the project could go forward without the Council’s approval of this master plan amendment. Mr. Whittemore responded that the legal answer was yes; however, as a practical business matter, the answer is no, because the issues that have been raised by the opponents have risen to the level of creating a degree of concern by potential lenders, which would preclude their ability to build this facility. He said they have done everything they can to comply with the required processes for this project—they are going to continue to dot their “i’s” and cross their “t’s” and continue to follow the processes required by the City. Ms. Carol Laford spoke in support of the Master Plan Amendment and the proposed casino project. There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed. Council Member Schmitt commented that a lot of time and money has been wasted on legal issues to prevent this project from going forward. It is time to accept the court’s decision and move forward. He said it was his hope that the Council would unanimously support approval of this Master Plan Amendment and allow things to move forward. Council Member Schmitt briefly addressed the most recent lawsuit, stating that there were specific laws regarding campaign contributions and that elected officials can vote on matters involving people who have given campaign contributions, because they are not considered gifts and do not warrant abstaining from votes. Mayor Martini said he reviewed the Planning Commissions report and that most of their objections were personal opinions and had nothing to do with land use planning. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve Resolution No. 3151, approving the Master Plan Amendments associated with PCN09005, adopting findings MP1 through MP4 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report. Council Members Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, NO. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSTAIN. Motion carried.


Page 19 of 19

9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 5:30:09) Council Member Ratti commented that she based her decision on a finding that she felt could not be made and she nothing had changed that indicated she should change her vote. That said, she agreed that it is time to move on and she would be at the ribbon cutting for this casino project “with bells on.”

10. Adjournment (Time: 5:30:28 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:30 p.m. ______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________ City Clerk >>>

Page 1 of 16

MINUTES OF THE SHARED SERVICES ELECTED OFFICIALS COMMITTEE MEETING

July 9, 2009, 12:00 noon Washoe County District Health Department, 1001 E. 9th Street, Building B, Room A

12:00 p.m. *1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 12:00 p.m. by Sparks Mayor Geno Martini. *2. Roll Call. PRESENT: Geno Martini, City of Sparks Mayor

Ron Schmitt, Sparks City Councilmember

Robert Cashill, City of Reno Mayor Sharon Zadra, Reno City Councilmember

Pierre Hascheff, Reno City Councilmember

Kitty Jung, Washoe County Commissioner John Breternitz, Washoe County Commissioner

Barbara Clark, Washoe County School District Board of Trustees Member

Ken Grein, Washoe County School District Board of Trustees Member

*3. Public Comment Howard Reynolds spoke regarding 1990 Fiscal Analysis for Consolidation of Police Services, which revealed action to be cost prohibitive due to NRS280.123, Subsection 5. 4. Staff presentations (Purchasing, Human Resources and Information Technology),

discussion and possible direction to staff regarding possible consolidation of service areas as requested by the Shared Services Elected Officials Committee.

��

• ��

o ��

o �� ! � ��

o ��! ��"��# "��$�$! $�� ! � ��

o ! ��%��%%�� ! � ��

o &� ��%%�'�� %�� '��

• �!"#$��%"�$& & ��' ��

o �� '��&��'��

o (�'�� # ��%��

o )��)�' �� '�� ))��*+�,��

��'��

• �$��"��$�#(� ��)��)��*��

Minutes Of The Shared Services Elected Officials Committee Meeting for July 9, 2009

Page 2 of 16

�$& & ��)"�#�+ ��"��

, � (�"

��$�� "��

��

�� , ��"��$�#(� ��)��)��*�� %�-� �� De��%�-� �� %�-� �� %�-� ��

�$-.�#, �� $#��/�0 �� .��/��%�� )�� &%0 �� )��

�12343�$�#(� ��)��%� ��/$0)"��.�� 5642�789:33� 54;3�48;:;<=�� 5>>8�;43:33�� 564>�838:33��

��)� ��

• �� ! � �� 1�� 1�� 1��

• �� '�� 1��

• ��2�� 1��

• 2��..�� 3�2�� 4�� 1�� 4��

• 2��.�� 3�&��2��

�� 1�� 1��

• & ��'�� 1��

• ��..3# &..�� 1�� 1��

• �� 5�� 1��

�$& -"��.��+ �� 6�� 2�� >�� 9��

�$��"��& �� $�(�� 563�333:33� 526�333:33� 526�333:33�� 526�333:33��

�)"�#��#"��? ��"@��#.$0"

�$�#(� ��)� �0$."A�� "? , ��.0�� /�B"#(��

o 5��%�� 6�� 7�185��%�� 6�� 2� ��7�91$+! �

• ��)��*��.��"�"�#" �

o ��%�-� �'$��%�-� �� %�-� �'$��%�-� �&��

��6%��

o ��'��

� ��%� �� &��

� ��6%�� 2� ��

o :��0 ��

o &��'%��'�%��

• �� .�� .�;��<��6��6�� =��$>��

o �� &��&�� 6�?�

� )��@ ��%��3! ��%�� %��

• &�� %�.��

� :��0 ��

� 2� ��%��

� &��

� &��'%�� %�� -��%��

� ��

� &�� @ ��

o 5��! � �0 �� &��5! �&��

� A��%��

� ��0 ��.�� & ��

� :��6%�� %��&��'$�! �� # ��

� ��%�-� �&��


Page 3 of 16

� �� %��:B�� 2�� '��

o ��

� :'%��0 ��.��

� �� '��'�%�

� :��6%��2%�� %��3��

� :��6%��3& �� ! � �%�

� :��6%��3& ��(�'��! � �%�

� ��2��%�� ! ��

� ��:B�� .�'��

o 5��

� ��5��5� ��

� ��3& ��5��%�� 1��2��%��

� �� %��

� & ��'��

� :B�� '��! � � �� 3��&��

� �6��.��:B�� )�0 �# � ��-��

o ��%%��

o # ��%�! � �%��:�� &��

o ��%�� &��%%��'�%��

o ��. �%��&��%�5� ��

� &�� 32� ��

o �� (�'�� C��%�& ��

• :�� 35� �%��

o ��%� ��%��. � �� & ��

� ��5� ��5��

� ��0 ��. �%� ��

� �6��.��

� # � ��-��%�� &�� '��

o # ��

� ��%� ��! ��%��:B�� # ��'��

��'�%��

o 5� �%�� &��

& ��

• �� % �.��%� �?�

o �%��0 �%%��'��6�%��/�� '�� 3��'��

�� "�0 ��%�� %��

��'�� B�� %%��$�

o 5��%�'�%��'��'� � ��%��%%�6�� %�'�%��

��'��%�'�%��%� ��$�

o 5�� %%�6��%��

��'� �� %��'��$�

�

�

• ��


Page 4 of 16

o ��%�-�� 3��%� �� %�� -��

�� '�� $�

o (�'��'�� %�'�%��'�� -��%� ��B��

6��0 �� "��%� �� 0 �%%��%��

6� ��'�� $�

o 5�� '�� 0 �� '��

�� '� �%��%�� 0 �%%�� '��'� ��

��%�'�%��'��0 ��'�� % $��

�

��1�� B�(�� %"� ��

• ��#��

o ��

� ��'��%%"��"�&��! � ��

� ! ��A�%%"��"�&��! � ��

o 5� �! � 6��

� ��'��"��D&�

� ��'��2��%��"��5��

� ��% �"��5��

� E��B"��

� �0 ��A��6�"�� %��

� E��A��"��

� ��! ��%%"��

� ��66��! ��-"��5��F��GH��"��

� ��'��"��

• ("��" "��, ��.0��

o , "��"C�

� # '��1II�A�� %��0 ��+4� ��<�6��%��

� E�� '��@ �� -��%��%��

� ��6��0 �� @ � �%��

� ��%��0 �� %%��

� ��'� ��/�%��'��6%�� %�A��

��

� �� %�� %��'� �� -��'��

� &6%�� %��0 �� %� %��/��

� ��'� �� -��%� �'�%��

� & '�� %��A��

� ��'�%��A��%��

o , "��"��C�

� A� � ��

• ��%�� "�� -��%%�"��%��"��$�

� � ��'�� -��

� &��%��

� )��<��

�


Page 5 of 16

o , "�"��" "��C�

� ��B�A� ��# � ��-��"�(�%�"��"��%��"�@ �

(�'�� 2� ��

� 1+"18J�: �%��

� &�� 6�� 6� ��?��98"48+"+K*��

� 4+��%%��'��2� �� & ��

� 1L�)�� (��%��

o , "��.�*"C�

� M�� 0 ��%��

� K�A��

� 4�� 0 ��%��

� K��%%��0 ��%��

� +��

� *�6��

� J��%��

o , "��%�0"C�

� +��%��

� 1��%%��

� 4��

� 1I��%��%��

� 4�� '� ��0 ��

� *��6��

� 1K��%�6��'� ��

• ��("��#�.�$�$�"B�� .�0��

o ��& ��. C�

� . ��'� ��

� ��%��'�� '��%��B��

� ��%��'�� B�� /��

�� %� ��%� ��

� �� 6��% ��N��%��;��A��

��

� ��%��0 %� �� '� �%� �� %��

�B�� %� �� -��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

Minutes Of The Shared Services Elected Officials Committee Meeting

Assistant Director

Employee Relations

Labor Relations

Assistant Director

Benefits

Health

Worker’s Comp

Classification & Comp

�

• ��("��#�.�$�$�"�$& ��" �$�#" ��#:��)��*��.��$#�$�"

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

• ��%"��#"�

o � $& ��

� ��'��6��'� �� A��'��

� ��"��

� (�'�� 6��6�� 0 ��

� :��6%��

• &%%�

• .��

� &�� '�� @ ��

�'�%�� "�� %� �� %� �� A��6��

��%

• D"��"E$��"& "��

o ��

o ��'��%�'�%� ��

o �� %�

o ��'�%��

o �%��%�� %��@ ��6<��'��

o ��%��

o ��.�'�� # .��

o �� O�%� ��O��

o ��%��/��

� . �%� ��

� # � �� -��%��

Minutes Of The Shared Services Elected Officials Committee Meeting for

Page 6 of 16

��-��

(�'�� 2��

Executive Director

Classification & Comp

Assistant Director

Civil Service

Recruitment, Selection, Retention

Employee Development

Assistant Director

Compliance

Systems

Payroll Systems

.�$�$�"�$& ��" �$�#" ��#:��)��*��.��$#�$�"�

��'��6��'� �� A��'��

��"��

(�'�� 6��6�� 0 ��

:��6%��

&%%��A�� %�� -��

.��6�� @ ��

&�� '�� @ ��

�'�%�� "�� %� �� %� �� A��6��

��%�

��

��'��%�'�%� ��

��'�%��

�%��%�� %��@ ��6<��'��

��%��

��.�'�� # .��

�� O�%� ��O��

��%��/��

. �%� ��

# � �� -��%��

for July 9, 2009

Assistant

HRIS

HR Systems

Payroll Systems

�

�

�

�

(�'�� 6��6�� 0 ��

�� -��

&�� '�� @ ��

�'�%�� "�� %� �� %� �� A��6��


Page 7 of 16

�

�

• �(�.."�)" �

o (�'��

o �� %�@ �%� ��%��'��/��

o �� %��/��

o �� %�

o A�.��@ ��%%�� %� ��

o ��%��@ ��

o ��

o # � ��-��%��

o &�� -��"�A�� '�� -��%��%�� 6��

%��"�0 ��%�� '� �%��

• �� "E$��"& "��

o "�& �

• . ��

• &�� <��

• A�.��B��

• �� %��

• D�� @ ��

• �6��%��B��

o ��F"#��.��

• ! �� %� ��

• ��

• 5� �%��

• E�� %�'��6%��

• ��

• ��

• ��

• ��%��@ ��/��

• ! ��@ ��

• ��& & ��"�%�#" �

o & ��

o 2��

o �%��

o �� %��

o : �%��%��

o A� ��.��

o �6��%��

o ��

o � ��'�%�� @ �5��

o # ��'��

• � ��& ��"0��

o 5�� %��


Page 8 of 16

• :%� ��

• �� %��%��%%�%��

o ��%��6��=��>��'��

• ��&�%��

• ��0 � ��6%��

• ��%�� %��

• � ��& ��"0�& ".��"�

o 2�� %�"��"��"��%��%%��'�$�� "�6��

�� -��"��$��

• �"��#$& "��

o �"�%�#"��!��& -��"0�

• & ��P�6��P��%��@ �� P�� %��%��P�A�.�� P�

%6��%��P�� P�0 �� '�%�� @ �� P��

��'��

o ��." �

o �� .�0��"00"& �)��(�# ' ��%�0"� �

o ��0�%�0$�."��0"& �)��(�# ' ��%�0"� �

• ��P��P�� P�� %��P��D&P�

�5��

• �"#�& & "�0�� ' �"!��"� �

o �� %��'��0 �� %��

o (�'��

o ��%� ��%��

o ��%� �� %��

�

��1��#�G��0"�-"�)��"��

• G� ��"& "��

o 5��6�� %��.�� 5��%� ��.5��'��6��

��"��"�� "�� %��"��

�'�� %� ��$�

• ��#��

o ��"��

� ��D� ��6��

� ��%��

o , � (�"��$��

� ��--��

o , � (�"�#(��.�� #��

� ��6�� 6�%%�

� ��'��A�%%�

� E��5��

o �"��H�(�"��

� ! ��! ��%%��

o ��

� �� 2��


Page 9 of 16

� �'��%��

� )��%�E��-�

� ��%%�

o ��

� � ��(�'��

o ��G��

� �� %��

� 5� ��

• ��0��) �

o .5��%� ��6��%�

o &�� %��%%�0 �� 6��.5"�� '�� %� ��

�� '��<��

o �� '�� %� ��

� ��

o �� '�� 6%��

� ��

o .5�� -��'��'��6�%��%�-��

��'��

• �(�.."�)"

o ��.5��'�� B�� %�� '��

� ��0 ��&��%�� $�11�*8��

� A� 0 �� $�1I��

� .�� $�1I��

� ��6�%�� $�1I��

� (�� $�1I��

� ��

� ��%%��

� :� �C ��:B��

• ��%��)��? ��0�

o ��%%�0 �2��

� ��/�%��'��

� ! �� 3 � � ��

� ��%�� %�3 �%�'��6%��3��

� �� 6%��'�� %�'��'�$��'��

� ��"�� :��.5��

� ��3� �%� ��99�� 6��

• �00�" �("�(�.."�)" �

o . �%� �� 3 �'��'��'�%�& �� &��

o �� -� �.5��'��

o . ��%%��

o ��'�%�� %� ��%��

o ��'�%��

o ��<��

o ! ��

Minutes Of The Shared Services Elected Officials Committee Meeting

DepartmentLiaisons

Administration

• ��"��.�$�#��.��)��*��(��

• ��#.$ ��

o 5��%� ��.�� 5��%� ��

� ��"�� "�� %��0 �%%��/��

��0 � �'�� %�

o (�'�� %%��'��

��%�-�� '��

o (�'�� 3��

o 5��%� ��%�� %��%"��/��

��0 ��6�� %��

o ��%� ��6�� %�� 6��0 �%%�6��%��

��%�� %"� ��'��

o ��<�� Following the presentations, remembering that there is an issue of capacity, for direction from the elected members on how they would like staff to move forward with implementation Reno Mayor Cashell stated that prior to moving forward tentity’s Council/Commission before wasting any more time and money. Sparks Councilman Ron Schmitt reiterated that he is interested in what the numbers are, and what savings will come from this, and he did not see anything inhave to do with numbers. He also stated that he wants to know what the return on the upinvestment will be. Washoe County Commissioner John Breternitz stated that as elected officialsalways be a concern about dollars and cents, but he didn’t expect those numbers to just pop out at this stage of the game. There are a lot of questions that need to be answered before the structural and departmental models can be considered. He stated that most interesting to

Minutes Of The Shared Services Elected Officials Committee Meeting for

Page 10 of 16

Governing Board

CIO

OperationsEnterprise

ApplicationsInfrastructure

�$�#��.��)��*��(��

5��%� ��.�� 5��%� ��

� ��"�� "�� %��0 �%%��/��

��0 � �'�� %��

(�'�� %%��'��

��%�-�� '��

(�'�� 3��

5��%� ��%�� %��%"��/��

��0 ��6�� %��

��%� ��6�� %�� 6��0 �%%�6��%�� "��/��'��

��%�� %"� ��'��

��<�� %��"��6%�� %�

Following the presentations, Washoe County Assistant Manager, Dave Childs asked, remembering that there is an issue of capacity, for direction from the elected members on how they would like staff to move forward with implementation

Mayor Cashell stated that prior to moving forward there must be buybefore wasting any more time and money.

Sparks Councilman Ron Schmitt reiterated that he is interested in what the numbers are, and what savings will come from this, and he did not see anything in today’s presentations that

. He also stated that he wants to know what the return on the up

Washoe County Commissioner John Breternitz stated that as elected officialsut dollars and cents, but he didn’t expect those numbers to just pop out

here are a lot of questions that need to be answered before the departmental models can be considered. He stated that most interesting to

for July 9, 2009

Strategic Planning&

Policy

5��%� ��.�� 5��%� ��

� ��"�� "�� %��0 �%%��/��

(�'�� %%��'�� "�

(�'�� 3��

5��%� ��%�� %��%"��/��

�� "��/��'��

%��"��6%�� %��

County Assistant Manager, Dave Childs asked, remembering that there is an issue of capacity, for direction from the elected members on how

here must be buy-in from each

Sparks Councilman Ron Schmitt reiterated that he is interested in what the numbers are, today’s presentations that

. He also stated that he wants to know what the return on the up-front

Washoe County Commissioner John Breternitz stated that as elected officials, there must ut dollars and cents, but he didn’t expect those numbers to just pop out

here are a lot of questions that need to be answered before the departmental models can be considered. He stated that most interesting to him, is


Page 11 of 16

that we go back to our respective bodies and ask if they are interested in looking at consolidating these three services. Commissioner Breternitz stated that we need to get the elected officials that are really going to be responsible for making the decision to step into the circle and say “Let’s go.” He stated that we can always pull out, so, let’s get a commitment or a non-commitment on these three services and begin the process of exploring further the benefits or downside to moving forward. Each entity can make its own course for how they want to proceed. He stated that he is interested in numbers, but thinks it is improper to wait till we have every bit of information in front of us before we decide if we are interested in looking at it. It is a waste of time if we are not going to be logical and follow this thing through. It is a waste of staff time and everything if the entity doesn’t really lean in the direction of doing some sort of objective look at these things. Reno Councilwoman Sharon Zadra stated that she would ditto Commissioner Breternitz’ remarks, and said that the most important thing that we can do as a community is to get our arms around this at the local government level or the State will do it for us and they are not equipped to evaluate it the way we are. We’ve been able to work with a lot of autonomy over many decades, but we aren’t in that situation now. We really owe it to this community and to each and every one of our employees to let them know that we are committed to looking at this consolidation effort. We can get the numbers along the way, but we need to have full endorsement of it, which she thought we had. She expected to hear a little more pro-activeness in the reports provided. They discussed future steps to take but they weren’t really identifiable. She said she thought we had committed to consolidation previously as local officials. She believes that local officials are a whole lot better equipped to consolidate services efficiently in our community than the State is. Reno Councilman Pierre Hascheff asked if there was any discussion at the staff level of maybe hiring somebody independently to review this, similar to internal auditors who would come in and look at best practices and maybe facilitate and provide us some outside analysis. Mr. Childs stated that there were discussions of independent review, though staff did not put numbers to that. The staff really felt that when you get to the point where you are going to move forward, it is necessary to have an outside party crunch those numbers or there’s going to be entities who aren’t going to comfortable with the numbers. So there will be a cost for that, but typically when that happens, they do some work and staff has to do a bunch of work. The cost will be based upon the level of analysis, probably not less than $50,000 for a study. Councilman Hascheff’s last question concerned the diversity of governance models in the staff reports. For example, on the Human Resources presentation, there are six recruiting platforms, nine HR information systems. There are so many things across the board with these entities, but the numbers should be one for each. We should just be using one system. How much money could we save on just that? In just the Purchasing piece there could be savings at just 10%, but it doesn’t tell what the full savings would be. Mr. Hascheff stated he would like to talk about the labor part – that is just the Purchasing piece – it doesn’t tell what the full savings would be. He stated that we need more information and he would like to look at those two issues and get some outside expertise on how to blend this all together and see what options are included. Competition for services would let us just have people bid on it. If Washoe County


Page 12 of 16

can service everybody, including Reno, for less than what it costs for us to basically fund a department – let’s take a look at it. We could transfer employees into that new non-profit or interlocal agreement just like we have with TMWA. Dave Childs explained for audience members who do not have the staff reports, that there are outlines in the reports of several governance models; a joint powers agreement, an interlocal agreement; a service bureau where all of the entities create a bidding process and that same model could be used with an independent, non-profit entity that lives or dies on its own ability to provide service at the lowest, competitive cost. The other option is to create some kind of special district or agency under statutes, and then there are blends of all of these. In every one, you will want some type of governing board and, in a lot of these models, the elected officials will delegate their County/City Manager to be on the Executive Committee and then that Committee runs that entity. Each of these models could use some kind of governance structure like that. Sparks Mayor Martini stated that this needs to be brought back to all of the entities, noting that he does not recall that the Sparks Council was definitely in favor of this particular forum as a consolidation effort. We are here to listen and get some information. Mayor Martini stated that he agrees with Councilman Schmitt that, before he makes any decision, he needs to see some numbers. Return on investment is a business model that he has lived by ever since he served as a banker. If we can go back to our boards and get buy-in from them that we move forward with some more steps, then there’s no problem. Reno Mayor Cashell stated he agrees with Mayor Martini because he thinks everyone has a lot of great ideas and things to look at and we can look at cost, but until we get a buy-in from our boards to spend money we cannot move forward. The City of Sparks has voted several times not to consolidate, so why would they want to do this? If Reno and the County want to do something, then they should look at that. The School Board, the RSCVA and everyone else has indicated that they are not interested at this time. The County and City of Reno could sit down and look at certain things if our boards buy-in to it. If they don’t buy in to it, we are wasting taxpayer dollars even sitting here today. Councilman Ron Schmitt stated that he agrees with Ms. Zadra that the staff reports show how staff feels about things, as politically correct as they could present it. Mr. Hascheff brought up a point about privatization, which may not be a bad thing. If we are willing to look at opening this thing up to non-profits for privatization, we can look at that, but it is a whole different thing than consolidation. Privatizing of certain functions inside an entity is a model that is being used out there quite effectively. He stated he is on board at looking a privatization of functions within an entity. Mr. Schmitt noted that he cannot go to the rest of the Sparks Council and say, “Reno, Sparks and the School District voted. Jump in on these three items that we’re going to support as we go down the road. They will ask the same questions. What’s going on here? How much money are we talking about and what does it look like for success or failure? If all we have are these staff reports to hand to them, I know what their answers will be, because these are not very encouraging. If I can’t say that I need a million dollars to work on Human Resources and I can


Page 13 of 16

expect a return on that million dollars in two to three years, I don’t think our Council will jump on that real quick. I want to know the numbers. If we are going to have to defend it at the Legislature, we’re going to have to have the numbers in two years. If there is no good documentation to back up our stance, either for or against consolidation, we’re going to look like the bad people. We might as well get the studies done and get the numbers. Sparks Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll noted that this discussion that elected officials are having is the same discussion the staff members had as they pulled these reports together. He stated that until the governance model is decided upon, and until a decision is made on do we continue to use the four ERP systems that we have (which represents a $20 million investment with several million dollar investment to convert), there is no way for staff or a consultant to decide what will happen. Mr. Driscoll referenced some general numbers – Washoe County has spent the past three years with their SAP system ($10 million in hard costs to bring that system on line). Washoe County School District’s system is around $4 million. The City of Reno has spent $2-1/2 to $3 million and City of Sparks is in the process of installing the software to the tune of $750,000. If the decision is made to go to the County’s system, that means there are $6 to $7 million of current investment, meant to have return over a six to seven year term, that will be thrown away and, depending on what decision is made to govern this, we may have to buy licenses for the three other entities and obtain user licenses or if a different decision is made, there might be a chance to live with just user licenses. User licenses are somewhere in the $500 to $1000 per user per year. Mr. Driscoll continued with the example that the City of Sparks has over 200 users that would be either inputting information or getting information out. We are the smallest agency and when you do the math, you are talking about millions of dollars to throw away one thing and millions of dollars that have to be spent up front to do the next step. So the governance component is why your staff has not been able to come to you and say, ‘This is what the cost is.’ There are big decisions that must be made to allow project to move forward. Each decision will bring differing costs and benefits. Your staff runs into a serious problem and a consultant would run into a similar problem because those hard decisions that have to be made that says here’s how you can cost it. This is the avenue based upon decisions and policies. Washoe County Commissioner John Breternitz stated that this is not a management consideration that only occurs in government. The key thing that must happen is the management entity needs to say, ‘we’re going to make the change.’ From there it may take five to ten years to implement, but decisions that are made every year to make small changes or address those systems could be done with an overall master plan or overall goal of consolidation, to have that single system-whatever the best practice is. Whatever the best system-that’s not my decision, because I don’t have any idea. If we don’t start someplace, we will always be this far apart. The group needs to decide if they want to participate, and find a common vision. Sparks Councilman Ron Schmitt stated that if you want to make policy direction, you simply direct your staff. The user groups that are functioning right now need to sit down and talk to each other and determine the best system to use. It is important for the staff that the


Page 14 of 16

government body of the agency to say that we believe in our staff. I don’t think they go out and buy an IT system just because it is going to be different from the other three. We need to create a policy that mandates that they talk to the user groups before they buy any system. Sparks Mayor Geno Martini stated one thing that, as Mr. Breternitz said, is right this is not going to happen in two weeks. The Legislature has thrown this stuff in our face. They are expecting something to be done by 2011 and it is not going to happen. It is going to take ten or more years. Washoe County Manager Katy Simon stated that she respectfully disagrees that we have to decide governance model first. She stated that she thinks you can grow governance model from a business model and from a business analysis. She respectfully suggested that the next step might be to get the discussion on a joint meeting agenda, and have each entity decide whether to move to the next step or not; to hire a consultant to develop cost estimates or not; and to determine what services you want the consultant to scope and to analyze. Mayor Geno Martini asked if everyone is ok with taking it back to our boards to see where they are. This received a vocal affirmation. Mr. Martini asked if it is acceptable to cover this at the next joint meeting. Councilman Ron Schmitt asked that results information on consolidated efforts that are going on right now be presented at the joint meeting. He noted that the City of Sparks has not received any information on Fire consolidation, and Senator Matthews recently spoke at the Legislation about a de-consolidation that occurred a few years back between the Airport Authority Police and Reno Police. Could we go back into the archives and find out about how and why that de-consolidation took place. He noted that Regional Planning was also de-consolidated in 1970 and then put it back in. We seem to be on a constant cycle, unable to decide which way we want to go, so if could we talk about at least what we have going on and why things got changed to the current model. Mayor Martini also asked that another consolidation area to look at is Animal Control Services. 5. Staff presentation, discussion and possible direction to staff regarding possible

governance models, technology enterprise software compatibility, start-up costs, possible savings from consolidated services and organizational capacity to implement multiple service consolidations.

This item was not reviewed until the previous item’s work is completed. 6. Staff presentation and discussion of background information regarding AB 494 relating

to required studies concerning consolidation of Public Safety, General Government and Public Works functions; and, possible direction to staff regarding next steps.

Washoe County Assistant Manager Dave Childs reviewed AB 494, noting the originally the work was going to be done by the Legislative Counsel Bureau. They had funding cuts so the Legislature decided that the local governments would do the implementation and the requirement


Page 15 of 16

is that by next September, the entities (Washoe County, Reno & Sparks and Clark County) must provide a report to the Legislative Counsel Bureau, so we have about 14 months, on three areas:

1. Public Safety 2. Public Works 3. General Government

There are a couple of questions to pose to the elected officials:

1. Does it make sense for the entities to work together and create a single report for the Washoe County, Northern Nevada area?

2. Does it make sense to also take this to the joint meeting August 17th and get buy-in and perhaps ask each entity to designate a staff person to be the point person for each of those three areas and report back to this group periodically?

Commissioner Breternitz stated that it seems that this is somewhat similar to what we have been talking about and for expediency if we could take this back to each entity and bring a decision to the joint meeting then we can move forward. Mayor Martini asked if this [report to the Legislature] is something that has to be done. Mayor Cashell advised that this is a mandate from the Legislature and we should bring this back to the joint meeting to see if we have a buy-in. He stated that the Legislature caused the Regional Planning Agency to come in with no funding, and here’s another example with this study they want, but they don’t want to pay for it. Maybe we should ask them for money for it. Sparks Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll noted that Clark County and the five cities that are in the south have the same assignment, though there is no legislative intent as to what the report needs to look like and what’s to be included. Mr. Driscoll suggested that staff be in contact with our southern counterparts to get a feeling for what direction they are going to go and then report back to this committee. Washoe County Commission John Breternitz stated that he doesn’t feel we should wait to see what they are going to do before we begin our process. Councilman Ron Schmitt noted, though he doesn’t feel we should wait, it will be very important when it comes time to report this to the Legislature that we should have a pattern, a model set up, If we are going to have six entities in southern Nevada and three up here, there will be nine reports and if they are all in different formats and different ways, with sixty-three legislators, it will be difficult for them to understand nine different reports. Councilwoman Sharon Zadra stated that five years ago many of the council went down to Las Vegas to meet with Clark County and Las Vegas, maybe it is time to take a look at calling that kind of meeting again because we keep talking about our concerns with the next legislative session and all of the new representatives that will be there and especially those here in the north are concerned that we’re going to be gobbled up by southern issues. Maybe we should try working with our southern counterparts now in creating this model for the Legislature.


Page 16 of 16

Mayor Martini asked if someone wants to contact the southern cities/county and Washoe County Manager Katy Simon volunteered to make that contact. Mayor Martini asked for consensus that everything had been covered. Councilman Ron Schmitt asked for clarification that AB 494 made requirement for only counties and municipalities, but not any other governing bodies and received affirmation that it pertains only to counties and cities. 7. Schedule next meeting of Shared Services Elected Officials Committee. Assistant County Manager Dave Childs stated that staff would like to meet at least ten days after the joint meeting to put things together and suggested that the second Thursday in September (September 10th) at noon. He also asked if the Committee had any other issues they would like to review, i.e. a document started in 2003 that was a set of guiding principles for cooperative delivery of government services. Mayor Cashell stated that the Committee should look at that document and we will know after the joint meeting which agencies want to buy-in to the program. 8. Discussion of possible agenda items for next meeting of Shared Services Elected

Officials Committee. 9. Adjournment. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 1:35 p.m. >>>

Page 1 of 20

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 3:00 P.M. Monday, August 10, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:01:33 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:01 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:01:41 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:01:58 p.m.) Pastor Ken Kasterko from University Family Fellowship was not present to give the invocation. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:02:10 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Phillip Salerno. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:02:37 p.m.) None. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:02:45 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. Item 5.3 was pulled from the agenda. Item 5.6 was pulled for separate discussion and vote. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: 3.1 Regular Meeting of July 27, 2009 (Time: 3:03:31 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 27, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Commendation to Janelle Yee (Time: 3:04:06 p.m.) Mayor Martini read a commendation for Janelle Yee to recognize her accomplishment as a recipient of the 2009 Alexander Hamilton Citizen Achievement Award, her outstanding academic record, and her active involvement in school and community activities. Ms. Yee and members of her family were present to accept the award and she thanked the Council for the recognition.

Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting for August 10, 2009

Page 2 of 20

4.2 Proclamation – Kindness Day (Time: 3:07:55 p.m.) Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming August 15, 2009, as Kindness Day in recognition of the importance and contagiousness of random acts of kindness. The proclamation was accepted by Alexa Bradiodus from The Summit. 5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:11:04 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve Consent Items 5.1, 5.2, 5.4, 5.5, and 5.7 through 5.10. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


transfers for the period July 9, 2009, through July 22, 2009 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.

5.2 Consideration and possible approval of the City of Sparks Public Sector Emergency Retrofit Plan to be submitted to the Nevada Energy Commissioner as required by the passage of Senate Bill 358

An agenda item from Deputy Public Works Director Pete Etchart recommending approval of the City’s plan to retrofit public buildings, facilities and structures, including, without limitation, traffic control systems, and to otherwise use renewable energy to serve those buildings, facilities and structures. This bill requires that the governing body of each local government develop and submit a plan to retrofit public buildings, etc.

5.3 Consideration and possible award of the Pioneer Dam Reconstruction

Project, Bid No. 09/10-007, PWP# WA-2009-352, to Peavine Construction, Inc., in the amount of $970,850

This item was pulled off the agenda.

5.4 Consideration and possible approval of the 2009 Summer Pavement Rehabilitation Program, Bid No. 09/10-005, PWP# WA-2009-340, to Atlas Contractors, in the amount of $655,638.95

An agenda item from Transportation Manager Jon Ericson recommending the City Council award the pavement rehabilitation contract to Atlas Contractors, as outlined. As part of the City’s Road Ahead Program, several streets have been identified as needing rehabilitation. These streets will be cold milled and replaced with type 3 asphalt pavement; the existing curb, gutter and sidewalk will be replaced; and handicapped ramps will be installed. The following roadways are scheduled to be rehabilitated: York Way; Oppio Street; Covina Drive; Verano Drive; Lorena Drive; London Circle; and Manchester Way. Atlas was the lowest qualified bidder for this project and funds are budgeted and available.

5.5 Consideration and possible award of the informal quote for the 2008/2009 Police Department Upper Stair Improvement Project, CIP 9039R to Valley Concrete, for the base quote and additive alternative in the amount of $26,009.90

An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending the City Council award a contract to Valley Concrete, as outlined. This project will reconstruct the deteriorated


Page 3 of 20

stairs and railing that provides access to the Police Department Plaza entrance. Valley Concrete submitted the lowest base quote and additive alternative for this project and funds are budgeted and available.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval of the informal quote for the Rock

Boulevard and Hymer Avenue Sewer Rehabilitation Project to Gerhardt & Berry in the amount of $50,234.50 (Time: 3:11:48 p.m.)

An agenda item from Civil Engineer John Martini recommending the City Council award a contract to Gerhardt & Berry, as outlined. This project will rehabilitate approximately 210 linear feet of sanitary sewer pipe located in Rock Boulevard near the intersection at Hymer Avenue. Gerhardt & Berry submitted the lowest quote for this project and funds are budgeted and available. Mayor Martini noted that Council Member Salerno would be abstaining from the vote on this item. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Consent Item 5.6. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSTAIN. Motion carried.

5.7 Consideration and possible approval to renew the Hospital Services

Agreement with Northern Nevada Medical Center, a PPO provider for the City’s Self-Funded Employee Benefits Medical Plan

An agenda item from Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson recommending the City Council approve the renewal of the PPO provider agreement with Northern Nevada Medical Center. The current agreement expires December 31, 2009. This hospital services agreement will be effective January 1, 2010 and may be continued through December 31, 2012.

5.8 Consideration and possible approval of a Consultant Agreement with Brown

and Caldwell for Design of Digester Repairs at the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility (TMWRF) with the City of Reno in the total amount of $305,738, and Sparks’ share being $95,910

An agenda item from Wastewater Treatment Manager Randall Gray recommending the City Council approve a consultant agreement through the City of Reno for design of digester repairs at TMWRF. The City of Sparks will reimburse the City of Reno for our share of the costs. This design contract will review, analyze, and prepare construction documents with engineering support services upon the successful bid and award of this project.

5.9 Consideration and possible award of the Westbound Victorian Sanitary

Sewer Rehabilitation Project, Bid No. 09/10-003, PWP No. WA-2009-327, to Peavine Construction, Inc. in the amount of $141,000

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Andy Hummel recommending the City Council award a contract to Peavine Construction, as outlined. This project will replace and old oversized sewer main no longer required with a new 8 inch PVC sewer line which will be regarded to provide a better slope and flow velocity and tie in the remaining services attached to this line. Funds are available for this project.


Page 4 of 20

5.10 Consideration and possible approval of an agreement with the Truckee Meadows Water Authority (TMWA) to extend and amend the Grant of Rights of Way Agreement (A-3074) for an additional ten years, through July 31, 2019

An agenda item from Utility Manager JoAnn Meacham recommending the City Council extend and amend A-3074 to extend the terms for an additional ten years and provide for recording of specific easements. There is no change in the provisions to collect and distribute the right-of-way toll of 5% of gross receipts. The TMWA Board of Directors approved the extension of this agreement on July 15, 2009.


6.1 Consideration and possible approval of renewing the City’s financial support

for the Economic Development Authority of Western Nevada (EDAWN) for fiscal year 2009-10 (Time: 3:12:14 p.m.)

Assistant City Manager Randy Mellinger stated that we have budgeted for this item and we expect EDAWN to continue the work they are doing trying to create jobs in this area. EDAWN provides updates to the Council on the work they are doing for Sparks and the entire region twice a year. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve renewing the City’s financial support for EDAWN for fiscal year 2009/2010 in the amount of $35,000. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.2 Consideration and possible approval of elected official appointments to the

Regional Planning Governing Board Time: 3:13:37 p.m.) City Clerk Linda Patterson noted that while doing some research on appointments to the Regional Planning Governing Board she discovered that the elected officials needed to be appointed/reappointed to this board. The City of Sparks has three appointed positions for staggered three-year terms. The current members are Mayor Geno Martini and Council Members Mike Carrigan and Ron Schmitt. Mayor Martini’s current term expired June 30, 2009. He needs to be reappointed or the Council needs to select a Council Member to take his place. The term will be until June 30, 2012. She also noted that Council Member Carrigan’s term expired June 30, 2008; however, at their meeting of December 15, 2008, the Council approved various boards and commission assignments, including another term for Council Member Carrigan on the Regional Planning Governing Board. His term on the board will expire June 30, 2011. Council Member Schmitt noted that this board is an unfunded mandate from the State Legislature and it costs the citizens of Sparks over $300,000 a year. He said that this is an example of how consolidation costs the citizens. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to confirm Mayor Martini’s reappointment to the Regional Planning Governing Board for a term


Page 5 of 20

through June 30, 2012, and reaffirm Council Member Carrigan’s term on the Board through June 30, 2011. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.3 Consideration, discussion and possible approval of the Mayor’s

recommendation of appointment to the Regional Planning Commission (Time: 3:16:32 p.m.)

Scott Barnes’ term on the Regional Planning Commission expired on June 30, 2009. The term is for three years and a replacement must be appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the Council. Mayor Martini stated that he had spoken to all the members of the Sparks Planning Commission and Doug Voelz was willing to serve on this board as a representative for Sparks. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to confirm the Mayor’s appointment of Doug Voelz to the Regional Planning Commission. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.4 Discussion and possible acquisition of RTC transit buses for Special Events

(Time: 3:18:18 p.m.) Public Works Maintenance Superintendent Ron Korman noted that staff was directed by Council Member Smith to look into acquiring some buses from the RTC to be used for special events transportation. Staff contacted RTC and examined the busses that they had available for donation to the City. Staff then analyzed the initial costs ($12,489) and yearly costs ($16,489, including insurance) for maintaining the buses. City Manager Shaun Carey noted that the in addition to transportation for special events, the Parks and Recreation Department is anticipating the ability to move children to different activities. We have relied, for a long time, on the Washoe County School District for bus transportation for our recreation programs. The buses will enhance our travel opportunities for recreation programming. Council Member Smith noted that 22 employees stepped up to take the additional driver testing to be able to drive the buses. Mayor Martini stated he felt this was a great opportunity for the City A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the acquisition of two RTC buses for special events and other uses. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.5 Discussion, consideration and possible adoption of Resolution No. 3153

revising the membership requirements of the Sparks Tourism and Marketing Committee to two members of the City Council to be appointed by the Sparks City Council (Time: 3:21:22 p.m.)

City Manager Carey noted that this was a “clean-up” item associated with our understanding of Assembly Bill 444. We believe that we should have the City Council responsible for tourism funds. This resolution simply designates that the Chair and Vice Chair of the group will come from members of the Sparks City Council. It does allow for the current members on the


Page 6 of 20

committee to continue to serve on the committee, but it does remove the prior designation of the Redevelopment Agency. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Resolution No. 3153, revising the membership of the Sparks Tourism and Marketing Committee to two members of the City Council to be appointed by the Sparks City Council. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.6 Presentation and possible adoption of Resolution No. 3154 to establish a special revenue fund called “Tourism and Marketing Fund” (Time: 3:22:56 p.m.)

Finance Director Tom Minton stated this resolution will clarify the budget and bookkeeping for the Tourism and Marketing (Tourmark) funds. The funds were previously deposited in the revolving fund of the Redevelopment Agency and consequently they were mixed in with other monies. Creating a new fund will allow us to track the statutory payments and also give budgetary approval. Council Member Smith asked if all the special event funds would be in this account. Mr. Minton clarified that only the Tourmark funds would be in the account—meaning only the RSCVA funds that they pay us. City Manager Carey noted that staff is still working on the policy considerations to have consistency in the review of special events that are large in nature and which would involve redevelopment agency spending as well as city spending. This resolution is important because it repeals and previous resolution and redirects these funds properly. The actual policies for use of public funds for special events will come back to the Council for review and possible approval at a later time. Council Member Schmitt stated the purpose of the resolution was to give the Council feedback from the Tourmark Committee. However, under article 11, it gives the City Manager authorization to approve up to $25,000 in spending. He asked the Council if they wanted just to see what is spent, or do they want to have approval over everything that is spent. Council Member Salerno stated that they should be aware of any funds that are spent, but shouldn’t necessarily have to vote on it. Council Member Carrigan said he would prefer to have the Tourmark Committee “do what they needed to do” and then report once a month or so at a council meeting regarding what had been done. Council Member Smith commented that all they are looking for is “transparency.” City Attorney Adams stated he crafted the resolution to give the City Manager spending authority up to $25,000 annually, not per item or expenditure. Council Member Schmitt said that it has been his experience that this account has been handled very conservatively and openly and he would hate to see things get “bogged down” in Council every time a decision has to be made, particularly since the special event season is very fluid.


Page 7 of 20

City Manager Carey stated he would prefer that this resolution mirror the City’s regular purchasing decisions, which is gives the City Manager purchasing authority up to $25,000 per item/occasion. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to adopt Resolution No. 3154, to establish a special revenue fund called “Tourism and Marketing Fund,” amending the resolution to delete Section 11 in its entirety. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.7 Presentation, discussion, and possible direction or approval of the American

Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) (Time: 3:30:49 p.m.) Government Affairs Analyst provided an update to the Council, stating we did receive COPS grant funding. Sparks was one of only four cities that received funding under this grant. The Public Works Department is diligently working on getting their funding. They have submitted all their paperwork and are hoping to have an answer from the Department of Energy by October. Tracy Wheeler reports that the HUD grant funding is coming along, as well. We received notice that the markups are almost approved for our Federal FY10 requests. The only thing we have seen so far for transportation is $1.6 million for the Pyramid corridor. Mr. Carey noted that Chief Asher has received the grant documents and is working to finalize them; which includes including the COPS grant in the budget and receiving permission from the City Council to fund the grant. He stated the documents have to be completed in a 90 day period and unless the Council wanted to see the paperwork, staff would simply carry it out.

6.8 Consideration and possible approval of Resolution No. 3155, consenting to

Relinquishment and Land Transfer Agreement for SR-663 (Oddie Boulevard) (Time: 3:33:28 p.m.)

Real Property Agent David Vill explained that the next three resolutions under Items 6.8, 6.9, and 6.10 are consenting to land transfers (roadways) from the Nevada Department of Transportation to the City. The first one is for approximately 1.53 miles of Oddie Boulevard. The second one is for 0.302 miles of Victorian Avenue. The third one is for .40 miles of Kietzke Lane. Each one of the land transfers were approved in a cooperative agreement in August of 2008 and these resolutions finalize the relinquishments. There are dollars attached to each of the relinquishments and there are some water rights attached to one of the roadways (so far). Mr. Vill stated the transfer of the roads and rights-of-way will give the City control of operations and maintenance; access to the roads; the right to develop or redevelop; will eliminate FHWA oversight; and will better fit into the regional road system, rather than be a part of the State highway system. Council Member Smith asked if there was money that came with these roadways. Mr. Vill stated the overall amount is approximately $836,000, plus water rights, if they are available. Mr. Smith commented that this money will take of the maintenance of the roadways. Mr. Vill stated the roadways are built to highway standards and the Public Works Director has assured him that the roads are in good shape.


Page 8 of 20

A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Resolution Nos. 3155, 3156, and 3157, consenting to Relinquishment and Land Transfer Agreements for SR-663 (Oddie Boulevard), SR-647 (Victorian Avenue), and SR-667 (Kietzke Lane), as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Relinquishment and Land Transfer Agreement for SR-647 (Victorian Avenue) (Time: 3:36:50 p.m.)

The discussion for this item is listed under Item 6.8. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Resolution Nos. 3155, 3156, and 3157, consenting to Relinquishment and Land Transfer Agreements for SR-663 (Oddie Boulevard), SR-647 (Victorian Avenue), and SR-667 (Kietzke Lane), as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Relinquishment and Land Transfer Agreement for SR-667 (Kietzke Lane) (Time: 3:36:50 p.m.)

The discussion for this item is listed under Item 6.8. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Resolution Nos. 3155, 3156, and 3157, consenting to Relinquishment and Land Transfer Agreements for SR-663 (Oddie Boulevard), SR-647 (Victorian Avenue), and SR-667 (Kietzke Lane), as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.11 First Reading and possible discussion of Bill No. 2610, a voluntary

annexation request, in accordance with the City of Sparks 7-year Annexation Program, by Tahoe Reno Commercial Center, LLC, for a parcel 30.23 acres in size, generally located west of the USA Parkway Interchange, east of the Patrick Interchange, shares the southern property line with the right-of-way of Interstate 80’s west bound lanes and is approximately 10.5 miles east of the intersection of Vista Boulevard and Interstate 80 within the City of Sparks Sphere of Influence. Upon annexation, the zoning would convert from a Washoe County designation of Industrial to a City of Sparks zoning designation of I (Industrial) (Time: 3:37:50 p.m.)

City Clerk Linda Patterson read the bill by title. Mayor Martini noted that the second reading and public hearing was scheduled for August 24, 2009.

6.12 Presentation, discussion, and action on the consolidation reports from Human Resources, Information Technology, and Purchasing (Time: 3:38:47 p.m.)

Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll introduced Community Development Director Neil Krutz and noted that Mr. Krutz is assigned to the Regional Shared Services Team. He noted the Team


Page 9 of 20

received presentations on possible consolidations at a meeting on July 9th. He asked staff to provide a brief overview of those three presentations to the Council as follows: �� Purchasing Manager Dan Marran noted that from our perspective, consolidation should be about the improving of efficiency in an organization. In purchasing, we look at what we buy and how we buy it. Regionally, public purchasing has been sharing contracts, bids, and expertise for over 25 years through the Northern Nevada Consortium for Cooperative Purchasing. He said there are not a lot of areas where we can move forward because they are already sharing. However, there are some things that we do not buy together—supplies that the City would not need, that the School District might purchase. Mr. Marran continued his presentation as outlined below: �

��

�

��

� ��

��

��

��

�� !��

��

��

��"�� #��

�$%&'&�� (��#�� )*'%+,-./&&� )'0&+'-0/012�� )33-+0'&/&&�� )*'3+-&-/&&��

��

• ��

• �� !��" ��

• �� #��

• #��$% � �&�'�#��$% �&�

$ �&�� (�� (��

• #��$% � �&'��

#��$% �&��

• ��) � �� "��

• ��'� ��

• ��) �*��

4 �� "�� 5�� *�� %�� 3�� .��

��6�� )*&+&&&/&&� )%*+&&&/&&� )%*+&&&/&&�� )%*+&&&/&&��

��7 ��89��

��: ��;�� 4 �7 � �� <�5�� #�= ��

�� "��>'. �� "��#��>)'/*:

��

• $��+��,��-��-�� .��/0&�

�� -��

• �� 1 �2 �3��'� �� !��

• �� 3��!��

• �4��!� �� ) ��


Page 10 of 20

• �#��1��

• ��

• ��!!��"��3 ) ��$�� &�

• ��) ��

• �� 2 �1�!��

��

• �4��!� ��1��

• �� !�� 5�4��

• �� 5�6 �� 3�"��

• �6 ��) !� �� 1��* ) �� '#��6��

• �6�� 7�"��5�% ��8��9��

�) ) ��

• �� '�� ) �8��!��

�� "�� ) ��) ��/�

• �7 "��"�� "��" �� : ��-��

�� ;�� ) ) �� -��" ��/�

• �*�� " � ��!�� 8��"��!� � �

�� " �� "�� !��" �� "��

��" �� "��) ��) ��/��

Council Member Schmitt expressed concern regarding the cost of staff time to put together all the consolidation reports versus the amount of savings we may or may not see if consolidation actually did occur. �

?�� =@��%&&0Human Resources Director Chris Syverson stated they were charged with putting together a cross-functional group from different agencies to look as consolidation. She noted that in addition to Washoe County, Reno, and the School District, they also invited RTC and the RSCVA to participate in the study. She said she was asked to give a disclaimer that although the participants agreed to participate in the study, it doesn’t mean that they are willing to go forward with consolidation. She said the premise they based their study on was “what are the things we would have to consider if we had to go forward with consolidation?” Ms. Syverson then continued her presentation as outlined below:

*��% ��<1�

• % ��1�!��

o � "��==�<1��) !�� >(�� ,�-��

o �>;�?@�4) !��

o ��) - ��!�� -��A?;(?>;>BC��

o (>�� "��#�� ) ��

o �D��1�!��7��!��1��

• % ��9� � ��

o E�� !��) ��

o B�<1� ��) �� ) ��


Page 11 of 20

o (�� !��) ��

o B�!�� !��) ��

o >�� ) �8��! ��) ��

o C�-�8��8 ��) ��

o @�� !!� ��

• % ��" ��

o >�� !��) ��

o �� !��) �

o (�� !��) � ��

o �=��!��!��

o (�!��!��" �� 8��

o C� ��-��8��

o �B��!� ��-�� !��" ��

��

• �� ) ��7��

o �) !��"��

o �� " ��"�� :!��

o �� "�� !��:!��

�� ) !��) ��

o �� ) � �� -� ��F�� !+��<1��

o 1�� 8�� " ��) !��:!��

��

• ��

o 7�"��

o 3��2 �� "�� ) ��

o ��) !� �� ) ��

o 6 �� ) ��

o <1� �2 �!��) ��

o �� 2 �!��

o ��) ) ��

o � ��

o ��!�� ;�<1��8�� "�� ) ��-��

��;�� " ��

• *�� 1�� ) ��

o ��,��

o � ��

o �� ) ��

o * ) ��

o G�� "��-��

o ��) ��) ��

o ��) ) ��

o 1 �8��) ��

o 6� � � ��2 �� !) ��

o � � ��2 ��!��


Page 12 of 20

• 4�� ) ��

o *�� ) ��

� 4� ) �� ) ��

� �� ) �� !��!��) ��

o ��! ��-��.��0��"��

� 1 �8��

� �� !��!�-� ��

� 1��!��) ��

• 1��) ) �� 2 �� :�� !��

o 3��" ��

o 7�"��

o ��

o �� ) ��

Council Member Schmitt asked Ms. Syverson how much money she thought would be saved by consolidation. Ms. Syverson said there are certainly some economies scale with regard to recruiting and contracts, so it would be more than 10%, but that was a guess on her part.

9�� =��'&+%&&0Information Technology Manager Rick Bareuther noted stated the committee members for this study worked well together because we already share some IT services with other public entities. He stated that consolidation of the IT function depended on the complexity of the agency they work for. The potential for savings is there; if there was an intensive effort to standardize business functions among all the entities, across the board. If this were done, we would possibly achieve 5 to 10 percent savings by consolidating. He continued with his report as outlined below: ��

• ��*��" ��) �� :��) �� "��) ��

o �� !!� �� $!�/��C?&�

o <�� $!�/��=&�

o ��$!�/��=&��

o 1��!�� - � � ��$!�/��=&�

o 7��!��$!�/��=&�

o ��

o �� 8 ��

o 4��9��4:!��

��

��

#��6H�=�� A�;@?(;��@�� A>;?CB;((?�� A��;E>@;C�B�� AE;�ED;ED>��

��$6*4&�� (�� ((�� C(�� D=��

��) !��*�� C�� @�� ?�� C��

3�� @�� >?�� (>�� C=��

4) !�� ?EE�� ;?@D�� C;B�@�� ?;?>C'E(;===��

�!!� �� D(�� BD�� E?�� @@��


Page 13 of 20

� ��

��"�� (B�� C>�� @B�� (D=��

��+�� @E(�� ;(D>�� (;DC=�� C=;C==��

�� >=�� @�?�� ;�@=�� C;>==��

�� " ��$H��&�� @;�@=�� >;C==�� ?;C>=�� ?;===��

�

� �" ��6��

• 6�� #��

o 1�� " ��

o � � �� ') ��) ��

o �� '�� "��-��'� ) ��) ��

o 6��-��" �� "��"�/��" ��

o �� ;� ��4��*��

o ��' ) !��) ��AA��-�8��) �

6 ��

• �*�� -��

• ��! ��!�� -��*;��) ��" �� !��

) �� "��!��,��

• ��) ��" �� ) ��

• $��&�

• 3��) ��" ��!�� -��

• $��&�

• �*�� "��!��"��- � �� 5�$�� " ��

��!��&��

�

Mr. Driscoll thanked the staff for their presentations, stating they did the studies with the attitude of “what would happen if…” He said they do not have the ability, right now, to run the numbers on what it would cost to consolidate, but they do know that it would be very expensive to convert and/or consolidate some of our systems and the return on our investment might be small operational efficiencies on the back side. He said that the reason these presentations were made is so that the Council can give policy direction to staff that can be reported back to the joint meeting as to whether or not the City of Sparks is looking to continuing the discussion on consolidation and at what level the Council is willing to commit its resources. Mayor Martini noted that there was a request to speak regarding this item and he invited Trey Abney with the Reno/Sparks Chamber of Commerce to speak. Mr. Abney stated is has always been the Chamber’s policy “to support functional consolidation of appropriate services to optimize operational efficiencies and reduce the effective cost of government.” That being said, that is not a statement in support of consolidation for consolidation’s sake. He urged the Council to continue conversations regarding consolidation, but at the end of the day, it has to make sense to your citizens and it has to actually save tax dollars. If it doesn’t we shouldn’t do it.


Page 14 of 20

A discussion ensued regarding the wisdom of going forward with consolidation if there are no cost savings in doing so. Mayor Martini stated we have spent a lot of staff time studying consolidation, but we have to do this to make sure our constituents know we are trying to put their best interests forward with regard to consolidation or shared services. What sticks out for him is that it is going to cost quite a bit to consolidate and the cost savings will be very minimal, if any. For him, no consolidation is a “no-brainer.” Mr. Driscoll pointed out that currently there are over sixty services that we are doing in the region that are combined, consolidated, merged, or shared. A couple of years ago we made a business decision to move taxing authority from the municipalities to the county to spend more money for animal control—this was not additional taxes, but using the money differently to provide a better building and more services. This City has a great record of direction staff to be prepared to participate in conversations with regard to shared services and/or consolidation of services that will help the citizens of Sparks. He said that staff is looking for direction from the Council on what policy they want them to present at the joint meeting on August 17th on these three services and/or consolidation in general. Mayor Martini said we need to continue to get the word out to our citizens with regard to what we are being forced in to doing by other agencies. It was evident to him that there were a couple of agencies (Reno and Washoe County) that wanted to forge ahead with this with out knowing what the consequences or numbers actually were. Council Member Salerno noted that it is evident by the number of shared services that Sparks participates in that we are, and have been, looking for ways to save money. He felt that we should confirm our resolution that says where we stand and where our citizens stand on the issue of consolidation. Mr. Driscoll pointed out that the consolidation report that was approved by the City Council in November, 2008, has been personally given to each of the legislators during the recent session; it is on the City’s web site; and it has been given to each of the elected officials that are part of the joint meeting. Mayor Martini said the Council needs to provide direction to staff and he recommended that the Council accept the reports as presented and to state that we don’t see the savings or economies of scale for consolidating these three functions. Council Member Ratti stated that she believed that the reason the consolidation discussion got “ratcheted up” community wide had a lot to do with the scarcity of resources that has resulted from the economy. Consolidation may have looked good because it was a way to reduce the impact of making drastic budget cuts. She said if we asked staff to look at this in a different way, would we get a different answer? She said most of the discussion she has had with other elected officials that are very pro-consolidation has been discussed in generalizations, but there is not a lot of detail. The detail lives at the staff level, throughout the each organization, so maybe we need to ask them where they see possibilities to save money, rather than just ask them to study consolidation. She suggested we could reward employees for innovations that save money


Page 15 of 20

across the community. Ms. Ratti said she supports our resolution because she does not see any savings and no one has made the case for consolidation; however, she wanted to make sure we left a very wide door open for innovation, particularly on the part of staff, to bring us ideas to save money. Mayor Martini remarked that Sparks has always been open to innovation, but this item is requesting action on total consolidation and whether the joint consolidation teams have found any cost savings to be had by consolidation. Community Development Director Neil Krutz noted that the City has had an innovations reward program for quite a number of years. Mr. Driscoll noted that the City of Reno took action a couple of weeks ago to go study these three functions intensely for dollar savings and implementation plans to determine whether or not total consolidation of these three functions made sense and it what order they should be done. They spent staff time and hard dollars to hire an outside consultant to do this work because they feel that if staff is the only one that does the work, even though it will be great work, no one outside their organization will believe the results. Mr. Driscoll stated that the City of Reno has committed to go forward with consolidation; however, they respect anyone who doesn’t want to play and they have invited us to be “at the table to listen to their conversations” and if at any point that staff thought that best practices or if participation made sense, we would have the ability to participate at a later time. He said Washoe County will have the same conversation we are having today at their meeting to be held tomorrow. Council Member Carrigan asked if staff is looking for the direction of a combination of [the City of Sparks] being out [of consolidation], but continuing with shared services. Mr. Krutz stated the direction from Council could come in three steps: 1) to reiterate the Council’s commitment to looking for shared services when they improve the service, generate efficiency, or save money; 2) to say that, based on the information received to date regarding the three functions discussed, the Council does not believe it is in the City’s best interest to continue with consolidation of these functions; and 3) go one step further and say it is not in the best interest of our citizens to expend any tax dollars to expend to study any of these three functions further. Council Member Carrigan said he would like to make this his motion. Mr. Driscoll clarified that the Council could vote on two of these issues under this item and vote on the third step under the next item. Council Member Ratti said that we have discussed the three reports that we have submitted to various elected officials and she asked what reports or information have we received from Reno or Washoe County on their perspective on consolidation. Mr. Driscoll stated we have not received anything from them in writing. Our information has come from attending their meetings; listening to their conversations; and the official actions they have taken with regard to consolidation. We have received a copy of the agenda item [for consolidation] from Washoe County that is scheduled to be discussed at their meeting tomorrow. They will be discussing the same three reports, because those reports were done jointly by all three agencies. Mr. Driscoll said to his knowledge, no one has done the research and studies that our staff has with regard to consolidation. He said Las Vegas has used similar information and studies and they are talking


Page 16 of 20

about it, but their consultant had not been hired at that time. Mr. Driscoll stated that once again Sparks is the leader on this issue, because we are looking for anything that can help us save money and provide efficient operations and services to our citizens, not simply consolidation. Council Member Schmitt suggested that Ms. Ratti be provided minutes of past joint meetings from 2001, 2002, and 2003, and consultant reports in order to show how shared services came about, with the most recent shared services being in public works, where we are doing crack sealing for them and they are providing their street striper, etc. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to reiterate the City’s commitment to shared services where it saves money, generates efficiencies, or saves money; that it does not appear to be in the City’s best interest to continue with consolidation of the three areas of study (Purchasing, Human Resources and Information Technology); and that we don’t believe it is in our citizens’ best interest to expend any tax dollars to study consolidation any further. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.13 Presentation, discussion, and action on Assembly Bill 494 (2009) requiring the city to submit a report to the Legislative Counsel Bureau on consolidation (Time: 4:57:16 p.m.)

Community Development Director Neil Krutz noted that this was a continuation of our previous conversation regarding consolidation. AB494 required the government agencies within both Clark and Washoe Counties to submit a report on governmental consolidation and reorganization to the Legislative Council Bureau by September 1, 2010, for Public Safety, Public Works, and General Government. Staff is seeking policy direction from the Council as to how the Council wants to go forward in responding to this bill, so that both the council and staff are prepared for the Joint Meeting scheduled for August 17th. Mr. Krutz stated that Washoe County has brought up the possibility of all the agencies in Northern Nevada doing a joint report/study. However, the City of Sparks could also choose to go forward on our own and it might be in our best interest go do our own report. We have already done a lot of work on this issue and that information is posted on our Web site. Mayor Martini said we have already completed a large part of the required study and we need to put forward our thoughts and processes—we don’t want the other two entities to put words in our mouth. Community Development Director Neil Krutz asked the Council how they want to respond to the Legislative’s request regarding this study – do a joint study or our own study. He noted that Sparks has already done an extensive study on consolidation. Mayor Martini said he felt we should put forth our own study so that Sparks’ view point is made clear. Council Member Schmitt said past history has shown that all three entities are not going to agree upon the same study—whatever the results, one or another of the entities will “chew it apart” and


Page 17 of 20

create discontent. We have started the work, we did a great job during the legislative session, and we should just continue the process on our own. Council Member Carrigan said a good foundation for the required study is the information that we have already handed out, minus the three functions we have studied and insert the public safety, public works and general government functions. We already have shared services in these areas and can simply show all the things we do together. Mr. Krutz agreed that we already have a great deal of the work completed. Mr. Carrigan commented that he agreed we should do our own report—he did not want to “consolidate” the consolidation report. Council Member Smith made a motion, per the staff report. Council Member Carrigan requested a caveat to the motion that we put in what was talked about at this meeting… in other words, he did not want to see time spent on the report. He stated he felt we had all the information; we just needed to collate it. Council Member Schmitt said he did not mind staff spending time working on the report in order to present a very professional report. However, he did not want us to pay for an outside consultant to do the reports. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to direct staff to prepare and submit a City of Sparks report on consolidation or reorganization to the Legislative Counsel Bureau on or before September 1, 2010, as requested by Assembly Bill No. 494, with the caveat that we add the shared services information. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.14 Presentation, discussion, and action on Resolution No. 3158, re-affirming the Council’s position on regional government consolidation taken on January 28, 2002, under Resolution No. 2776 (Time: 5:04:52 p.m.)

Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll stated in meeting with the elected sub-committee for shared services, it was suggested that we refresh our previous resolution regarding government consolidation to update it with current information and allow the Council an opportunity to consider whether or not that resolution was still viable and whether they wanted to take action on the new proposed resolution. Council Member Salerno moved to approve the resolution and requested that in the reports that are submitted to the legislature it is made clear exactly what we have done as far as the resolution. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to adopt Resolution No. 3158, a resolution of regional government consolidation for the City of Sparks, as presented by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning:

7.1 Second Reading, Public Hearing, and possible approval of Bill No. 2609, amending the Sparks Municipal Code by eliminating the requirement that


Page 18 of 20

an individual have actual knowledge that a person is under the age of 21 to violate a criminal code section prohibiting the sale or furnishing of alcoholic beverages to a person under the age of 21; and providing other matters properly relating thereto (Time: 5:06:25 p.m.)

Assistant City Attorney Tom Riley noted that this ordinance removes the word “knowingly” from the criminal provision in our Municipal Code pertaining to the sales of alcohol to minors. Mayor Martini announced his recommendations for appointment to the Civil Service Commission were Steve Burley and Louis Dauria. He noted that when the word “knowingly” is in the ordinance, we have to prove, as prosecutors, that the person actually knew that they were selling to a person under 18 years of age. What has happened over the course of time is that some of those who have sold alcohol to underage persons have discovered that if they don’t ask for an underage person’s identification (ID) and then sell alcohol to them, if they are prosecuted, they have a defense because they did not ask if the person was underage, so they can claim didn’t know the person was not over 18 years of age. This is contrary to public policy against selling alcohol to minors (or underage persons); a policy which the City has been strongly enforcing. Mr. Riley stated that at the last meeting where this ordinance was discussed there was input from the Retailer’s Association and the Chamber of Commerce regarding the way the new ordinance would operate. They were concerned that their clerks could suffer a form of entrapment by virtue of the way the ordinance was written. To alleviate that fear, an immunity provision which is contained in the Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS), was added to our ordinance. This provision states that if the clerk asks for an ID and the ID appears facially valid, in as far as the persons age and identity (it is not clearly a false ID), then if that clerk then sells alcohol to the underage person, the clerk is immune to prosecution. Council Member Carrigan stated he did not see this provision in the ordinance as submitted to staff. Mr. Riley noted that the wrong ordinance was inadvertently provided to the Council in their packets. He stated when he realized the incorrect ordinance was on the internet, he asked the Clerk’s Office to put the correct ordinance on the City’s web page. Concern was expressed as to whether this met the requirements of the open meeting laws. A suggestion was made to defer the discussion on this ordinance to the next meeting (August 24th) in order to allow the public ample time to review the proposed ordinance, as amended. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed ordinance. Mr. Tray Abney, Reno Sparks Chamber of Commerce and Ms. Lea Tauchen, Retail Association of Nevada, stated that after speaking at the last meeting regarding their concerns with the proposed ordinance and working with Mr. Riley, City Attorney Adams, and Police Chief Asher to incorporate some changes, they now fully support the revised ordinance. There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to defer Bill No. 2609 to the August 24, 2009 meeting for a second Public Hearing and 2nd Reading. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Page 19 of 20

7.2 Public Hearing and possible approval of the abandonment of an easement for roadway and utility purposes described as Parcel 2 of that certain Grant, Bargain and Sale Deed, as filed in Official Records of Washoe County, Nevada on December 4, 1969 as Document Number 161114 (Time: 5:19:31 p.m.)

Property Agent David Vill provided some visual history of this abandonment and noted that Exhibit A1 has been revised and there is a new Exhibit and legal description. He explained that Ms. Furbeck’s parcel ownership extends to the middle of “I” Street. After extensive research it is apparent that the City never acquired right-of-way for “I” Street in that particular area. The original intention was to abandon portions of the street, but because we don’t own them, we can’t abandon them. The revised drawing and revised legal description show the area which is the subject of this abandonment. The portion north of Parcel B is owned by Ms. Furbeck and she is an applicant, along with the Truckee Meadows Water Authority (TMWA) for this abandonment. TMWA, the City, and Ms. Furbeck have agreed to do a merger and re-subdivision map which provides for the boundary lines and fence lines to be “cleaned up” and the portion that Ms. Furbeck owns in the middle of “I” Street will be dedicated to the City of Sparks. Mr. Vill stated that the City expected to find that we owned “I” Street, but we don’t. Therefore the appropriate action is to abandon a portion of the street to provide for the new sewer treatment plan for TMWA and continue with the merger and subdivision map which will give the City that portion of “I” Street that Ms. Furbeck now owns. Mr. Vill noted that this is the second time this item has come before the Council. The first time it was discovered that the maps were incorrect. They have since been corrected and the abandonment can proceed forward. He noted that TMWA is paying for all the work regarding this abandonment and they are also paying Ms. Furbeck’s taxes for last year. Council Member Schmitt asked for clarification regarding the abandonment. Mr. Vill assured the Council that the correct legal description was published in the newspaper and staff has not uncovered any other rights-of-way that are not owned by the City. He did note that TMWA is still researching this project and may encounter any further irregularities, but that is not the expectation. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding the proposed abandonment. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the abandonment of a roadway and utility easement, and the relinquishment of the public easement rights retained by the City, as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items: (Time: 5:25:47 p.m.) None.


Page 20 of 20

9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 5:25:47 p.m.)

City Manager Shaun Carey announced that applications are being accepted to serve on the Northern Nevada Water Planning Commission. He read the application requirements and noted that applications would be accepted by the Western Regional Water Commission until August 14, 2009 at 5:00 p.m.

10. Adjournment (Time: 5:27:57 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:27 p.m. ______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________

City Clerk

>>>

Page 1 of 10

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 3:00 P.M. Monday, August 24, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:01:19 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:00 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:01:25 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, Acting City Attorney Sherle Eiting, PRESENT. Council Member Phillip Salerno, City Attorney Chet Adams, ABSENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:01:56 p.m.) The invocation was given by Pastor Brad Dyrness from the Sparks Church of the Nazarene. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:03:34 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Julia Ratti. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:04:11 p.m.) None. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:04:20 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. Mayor Martini announced that item 6.5 would be pulled from the agenda because the presenter of this item, Community Relations Manager Adam Mayberry, was absent due to illness. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: (Time: 3:04:54 p.m.) 3.1 None. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

(Time: 3:04:56 p.m.) None.

5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:05:01 p.m.) A request was made to pull item 5.6 for discussion and separate vote. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.5 and 5.7. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

Regular City Council Meeting Minutes for August 24, 2009

Page 2 of 10


transfers for the period July 23, 2009, through August 5, 2009 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.


for Nevada Restaurant Services, Inc., dbat Big Kmart #4151, located at 2125 Oddie Boulevard, Sparks, NV, Submitted by Ms. Carmalen Gillilan

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve an application for a Gaming License for Big Kmart #4151. Ms. Gillilan is the compliance officer for Nevada Restaurant Services. The license will provide a $1,800.00 annual fee for 15 multi-denominational upright slot machines and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.

5.3 Consideration and possible approval of the destruction/disposal of original

building plans and associated documents that have been microfilmed (Community Development Department)

An agenda item from Community Development Director Neil Krutz recommending the Council approve the destruction of documents that have been microfilmed as outlined in the staff report.

5.4 Consideration and possible approval of Change Order No. 1 for the 2009

Curb, Gutter, and Sidewalk Program, Bid No. 08/09-033, PWP No. WA-2009-266, CIP No. 9092, to MKD Construction Inc., in the amount of $52,928

An agenda item from Transportation Manager Jon Ericson recommending the Council approve a change order for additional quantities of curb, gutter, sidewalks, driveways, and ADA ramps to include the south side of York Way between London Circle and Rock Boulevard prior to reconstruction of the roadway scheduled for this fall. The original bid was for work on the north side of York Way; however, the reconstruction of York Way has been moved up and there are sufficient funds available to repair the south side, prior to roadway reconstruction.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of the bid for “TMWRF Effluent Pump

Station Modifications and Upgrades Project—Phase 2”, Bid No. 09/10-006, PWP No. WA-2009-349, to RDC, Inc., in the amount of $175,700

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Janelle Thomas recommending the Council award a bid for effluent pump modifications to RDC, Inc. This project will consist of the demolition and salvage of portions of the effluent pump station components; roof hatch modifications; installation of butterfly valves; manifold modifications; and electrical modifications in order to reduce the hydraulic surge during normal pump operations and prevent further damage to the pumps. Funds were budgeted and are available for this contract.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval of additional funds to Stantec

Consulting Inc., to provide Tax Increment Financing Area Engineer’s Report for the proposed Copper Canyon Development (Time: 3:05:40 p.m.)

An agenda item from Community Development Director Neil Krutz recommending the Council approve the expenditure of additional funds to Stantec Consulting for completion of an Engineer’s Report in support of a Tax Increment Financing Study. Stantec has requested


Page 3 of 10

additional funds in the amount of $24,500 to complete the report and the developer is providing the funding. Council Member Carrigan asked if it would more appropriate to approve this item after item 6.2, a resolution approving this tax increment study. Community Development Director Neil Krutz noted that item 6.2 was a resolution to direct the City’s Engineer to move forward with studies. The additional funding for those studies is under this item, 5.6. Mr. Carrigan suggested that this item be approved after item 6.2. (Time: 3:24:20 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve additional funds to Stantec Consulting Inc., to provide Tax Increment Financing Area Engineer’s Report for the proposed Copper Canyon Development. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

5.7 Consideration and possible approval to add six (6) Police Officer positions to the Personnel Complement for which grant monies were awarded by the COPS Office Funding in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

An agenda item from Senior Human Resources Analyst Jenny Lewis recommending the Council grant approval to add six police officer positions to the personnel compliment. The Police Department has received approval for funding of six additional police officers as part of the ARRA of 2009 via the COPS Hiring Recovery Program (CHRP).


6.1 Consideration and possible approval of Resolution No. 3160; authorizing the transfer of the City of Sparks’ 2009 State Volume Bond Cap Share of $4,574,101 to the Nevada Department of Business and Industry for the purpose of providing primary mortgage financing to First Time Homebuyers at Marina Villas Condominiums at Sparks Marina (Time: 3:06:47 p.m.)

Housing Specialist George Graham explained that transferring the City’s State Volume Bond Cap will allow the Nevada Department of Business and Industry (NDBI) to provide First Time Home Buyer mortgage financing for qualified home buyers for the Marina Villas Condominiums at Sparks Marina Village. He noted that Mr. David Dahl requested that Sparks’ portion of the bond cap allocation be applied toward his project and NDBI is willing to comply with this request. Council Member Smith commented that by designating the first time home buyer bond cap for this project we are simply preventing the State from using it wherever they want to. He asked if it doesn’t get used at the Marina, can it be moved to another project. Mr. Graham noted we have three years to expend the bond cap and there is no risk to designating the funding to Mr. Dahl’s project. Council Member Schmitt asked if we would still have the ability to re-designate the funding to Nevada Rural Housing for another client if Mr. Dahl’s project does not go through. Mr. Graham


Page 4 of 10

explained that if Mr. Dahl’s project does not go forward, we have three years before we have to designate the funding for another project. Council Member Schmitt made a motion that included the transfer of the bond cap allocation to the Nevada Department of Business and Industry and/or the Nevada Rural Housing Authority (NRHA). City Planner Armando Ornelas noted that this “and/or” contingency was not included in the resolution. He said that in order to make a clean transfer of the bond cap, the resolution needed to be approved as written and if, in the event it becomes apparent that the Marina Project is not going to move forward, then staff would come back to the Council and ask for an alternative direction for the bond cap allocation, such as the NRHA. Mr. Schmitt indicated he had a problem with wording and the way the funds were being allocated. Mr. Ornelas said that it was his understanding that NRHA did not have a specific project at this time. Mr. Schmitt stated that when he spoke to them, they indicated they did have a specific project. Mr. Graham said he understood that NRHA had a mortgage certificate program, which was different from their programs for the past two years. Mr. Ornelas stated the alternative would be to split the bond cap allocation. Mayor Martini said he would prefer that all of the allocation be used in Sparks. Council Member Ratti pointed out that if Mr. Dahl’s project did not use all of the allocation, then it would revert back to the Nevada Housing Division. Mr. Graham noted that in the past two years we have split the cap between the Nevada Housing Division and Nevada Rural Housing Authority (50/50) and we have used all of our allocation on the first time home buyer program. Council Member Schmitt asked who owns the Marina Village project. Mr. David Dahl stated he was the manager of Marina Village, LLC and Villas at Sparks Marina, LLC and Villas at Sparks Marina, LLC owns the properties. Mr. Dahl clarified that he owns Villas at Sparks Marina and that it is not owned by the banks. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to adopt Resolution No. 3160; to transfer of the City’s 2009 State Volume Bond Cap allocation to the Nevada Department of Business and Industry for the purpose of providing primary mortgage financing to First Time Homebuyers at Marina Villas Project (325-375 Harbour Cove Drive, Sparks, NV 89434) at Marina Village. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, NAY. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.2 Consideration and possible approval of Resolution No. 3161; directing the

City engineer to prepare preliminary plans, cost estimates, and related items to finance the costs of an undertaking for a possible tax increment area formed pursuant to Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) Chapter 278C (Time: 3:20:49 p.m.)

Director of Community Development Neil Krutz noted that this resolution would direct the City Engineer (in this case a consultant, Stantec) to take a look at the possibility of establishing a tax increment area as part of the Copper Canyon Project—specifically the business park. This goes back to Council direction several years ago to look for possible economic development tools to help grow business park types of land use in Sparks. In the Copper Canyon handbook there is over 100 acres of business park land use. Staff has begun work with the owner’s representatives


Page 5 of 10

to see if there is interest on both sides. This resolution will provide a higher level of engineering analysis and cost estimates so that we can bring those reports back to the Council for the second step in establishing a tax increment area. This would be a go forward or not go forward type decision from the Council, based on the results of the study. Council Member Carrigan asked where the money [for the study] is coming from. Mr. Krutz replied that the land owner is paying for the study via a $75,000 deposit to the city for these studies. Mr. Carrigan asked if this was the same way we did the Kiley Ranch Tax Increment Area. Mr. Krutz confirmed that yes, this was the same process. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to adopt Resolution No. 3161; directing the City Engineer to prepare preliminary plans, cost estimates, and related items to finance the costs of an undertaking for a possible tax increment area within the Copper Canyon Planned Development pursuant to Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) Chapter 278C. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.3 Consideration and possible direction to initiate a code amendment to allow Adult Day Care as a permitted use in appropriate zoning districts in the City of Sparks (Time: 3:24:52 p.m.)

Senior Planner Jim Rundle stated that at the TOD (Transit Oriented Development) meeting, Council Member Ratti asked staff to consider adding adult daycare as a permitted use in other zoning districts within the City of Sparks. Staff is now asking Council if they want to proceed with this change. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to direct staff to initiate a code amendment to Title 20 (zoning code) of the Sparks Municipal Code to allow for Adult Day Care in appropriate zoning districts and providing other matters properly relating thereto. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.4 Consideration and possible acceptance of a donation from the State of Nevada, Office of Traffic Safety Joining Forces Grant in the amount of $122,640.00 (Time: 3:26:23 p.m.)

Police Chief Steve Asher noted that this grant provides funds to cover overtime costs for officers to conduct traffic enforcement activities in directed focus areas. Chief Asher stated that Sparks has participated in this grant program for the past five years. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to accept grant funding from the State of Nevada, Department of Public Safety, Office of Traffic Safety. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.5 Consideration and possible adoption of Resolution No. 3162 to recognize the

Sparks Citizen Advisory Committee (SCAC) and begin to appoint SCAC Members (Time: 3:28:15 p.m.)

This item was removed from the agenda.


Page 6 of 10

6.6 Consideration and possible approval of the Operation and Maintenance

Agreement for the Truckee River Irrigation Diversion at the Pioneer Dam with the City of Reno (Time: 3:28:16 p.m.)

Flood Control Manager Shaun Gooch stated this agreement is for operation and maintenance of the dam as it is to be relocated and reconstructed. Pioneer Dam is directly upstream of the Greg Street Bridge, between the TMWA Glendale Treatment Plant and the Grand Sierra Resort. He noted the next item is the award of a contract for the relocation work, but the agreement needs to be approved before the bid award. The agreement lays out the responsibilities of the two cities on operating and maintaining this irrigation/diversion structure. The first three years of operation will be at the expense of the City of Sparks through our public works department and maintenance services group. After three years, an evaluation of the expenses and costs of operation will be made and it is then anticipated that the City of Reno will take over maintenance and operation of the structure. Council Member Carrigan asked if this diversion dam diverts the water to the Pioneer Ditch and noted that the City of Sparks is moving the ditch as part of the flood control program. Mr. Gooch replied that there is some relocation of the alignment of the ditch along Mill Street east to the North Edison area, but the actual diversion dam area is not in the flood project. Council Member Carrigan expressed concern that with only four users of the ditch, the diversion dam might not be necessary. Mr. Gooch said it would be difficult to get the property owners to give up their rights to the ditch. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve the Operation and Maintenance Agreement for the Truckee River Irrigation Diversion at the Pioneer Dam with the City of Reno, as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.7 Consideration and possible award of the Pioneer Dam Reconstruction Project Bid No. 09/10-007, PWP No. WA-2009-352, to Peavine Construction, Inc., in the amount of $970,855 (Time: 3:33:40 p.m.)

A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to award the Pioneer Dam Reconstruction Project to Peavine Construction, Inc., in the amount of $970,855. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried. (Time: 3:34:22 p.m.) Mayor Martini asked Boy Scouts in the audience to introduce themselves. 7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: 7.1 Second reading, public hearing and possible approval of Bill No. 2609, an

ordinance amending the Sparks Municipal Code relating to the sales of alcoholic beverages; eliminating the requirement that an individual have actual knowledge that a person is under the age of 21 years to violate a criminal code section prohibiting the sale or furnishing of alcoholic beverages to a person under the age of 21 years; effectively imposing strict criminal


Page 7 of 10

liability upon an individual who sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to persons under the age of 21 years without first demanding and being shown a facially-valid form of identification; providing a defense if shown a facially-valid, but false, form of identification; and providing other matters properly related thereto (Time: 3:35:45 p.m.)

Senior Assistant City Attorney Tom Riley stated noted that this is the ordinance that was amended at the last meeting (August 10th). It removes the word “knowingly” from the existing ordinance (referring to sales of alcohol to minors) and puts in an exception for those clerks who actually check and ID and the ID is apparently valid. He said the new ordinance is in line with what the retailers wanted to see and it should assist with prosecution of those who violate the ordinance. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding this proposed ordinance. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve Bill No. 2609 (Ordinance No. 2429). Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items:

8.1 Public Hearing, second reading, discussion and possible action on PCN09018, Bill No. 2610, an ordinance for a voluntary annexation request, in accordance with the City of Sparks 7-year Annexation Program, by Tahoe Reno Commercial Center, LLC, for a parcel 30.23 acres in size, generally located west of the USA Parkway Interchange, east of the Patrick Interchange, shares the southern property line with the right-of-way of Interstate 80’s west bound lanes and is approximately 10.5 miles east of the intersection of Vista Boulevard and Interstate 80 within the City of Sparks’ Sphere of Influence. Upon annexation, the zoning would convert from a Washoe County designation of Industrial to a City of Sparks zoning designation of I (Industrial) (Time: 3:39:24 p.m.)

Senior Planner Jim Rundle and Community Development Director Neil Krutz noted that this annexation request for 38 acres located in the East Truckee River Canyon. Mr. Rundle noted that staff recommended denial of this annexation request to the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission is forwarding a recommendation of denial to the City Council. Mr. Rundle stated staff is recommending denial because an area plan has not been completed for the site, or for the East Truckee River Canyon area. Therefore a facilities and services plan has not been approved or considered. Mr. Rundle stated annexation of this site could provide challenges for public safety provision, as well as provision of infrastructure as we are unaware, at this time, as to what demands there would be for these services in the East Truckee River Canyon. He said an approved facilities plan and an area plan would allow staff to recommend approval of this annexation because we would know what services would need to be provided and we would have a plan for providing them at the time of annexation. Mr. Rundle stated staff wanted to encourage the property owners in the East Truckee River Canyon to work together to develop a facilities and area plan so that the City can move forward with consideration and development in the East Truckee River


Page 8 of 10

Canyon area. Approval of this annexation request at this time could erode our stance that we need to work together to get that area plan completed before we annex land. He reminded the Council that we did annex three parcels (one site) in that Canyon, prior to the legislative session ending, so we obviously have an anchor in the area for a discontiguous annexation. Council Member Smith commented that this site is almost four miles past the previously annexed 300 acres and he would like to see all the property owners in the area get together and annex everything at one time; he did not want to annex just 30 acres here and there and create islands of annexed property in the County. Council Member Carrigan asked if the Planning Commission just approved a solar farm located in the Canyon. Mr. Rundle responded that it was located just northwest of the parcel we are discussion today. He referred to a letter in the staff report from the Washoe County Community Development Department which states that this parcel is part of a 2,623 acre proposed master plan and asked why there was a request to annex just this portion of the project. Mr. Rundle emphasized this was a voluntary annexation request from Tahoe Reno Commercial Center for just the 30 acres because this is the portion of the master plan that they control. Mr. Rundle also noted that this property is not in the City’s annexation program and pointed out that all the “blue” portions of the map (included in the staff report) were parcels for which the property owners could request a discontiguous annexation, if they met all the required findings. This parcel is a “blue” area, but staff does not believe it meets all the required findings that are required for a discontiguous annexation. Council Member Carrigan noted that the applicant was not present to answer questions regarding this request and he did not understand why it was important to the applicant to have this parcel annexed at this time, instead of waiting. Mr. Krutz stated the applicant was made aware of the date and time of the public hearing and he did not know why they applicant or a representative was not present at this meeting. Mr. Rundle stated that if the City were to annex this parcel, then the applicant could request a contiguous annexation for the rest of the parcels in the project. Council Member Schmitt said it was his understanding that the request for annexation of the 30 acres has been in process for quite some time and that the reason for the request was so that they could get financing for the solar generation project—to show the bank that the City is interested in annexation in this area. Mr. Schmitt commented that the Sparks Planning Commission approved the solar generation facility as being in our Sphere of Influence and the County provides services for the facility. However, there are no tax revenues to the City from this project and there is no incentive for the owners to come back and annex the 2,600 acres into the City at some point in the future. Mr. Rundle said this may be true; however, if we were to update our annexation program in seven years, we could include that parcel in our annexation program. Mr. Krutz stated that where it [annexation] makes sense from a developer’s side is if the parcel is part of a larger concept or plan that might take them into land that we might be consideration for annexation into the City. Mr. Schmitt maintained that once the solar project is approved, there is no economic benefit to a developer to annex into the City. The purpose of annexation is to get a higher/better land use designation for property than the County would allow.


Page 9 of 10

Mr. Schmitt commented that he felt this annexation was politically and financially motivated because the major property owners in this area can’t agree on the area plan. He said we should have the same reasons for approving this annexation as we had for the previous annexation—because we need to get something happening in this area. Council Member Ratti said the bottom line is: we can’t make the findings; the applicant is not present to explain why we should consider a different approach to his request; we don’t know what the fiscal impact could be; and it is a discontiguous annexation located for miles past a previously approved discontiguous annexation. She then made a motion to deny the annexation request associated with PCN09018 approving approximately 30 acres into the city of Sparks, based on findings A1 through A3 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report. The motion was seconded by Council Member Smith. Council Member Carrigan asked if the Council would be approving the Special Use Permit for the solar farm. Mr. Rundle responded that no, Special Use Permits are not usually approved by the Council, but the Council could request to review any permit application that it wished. Mr. Carrigan said he agreed that once the solar farm is approved, there is no motivation for the developer to annex. Mr. Rundle explained that the City has exercised our extra-territorial jurisdiction to ensure that this project is built to City of Sparks’ standards and we can amend our 7-year annexation program to include this parcel. Mr. Schmitt emphasized his concern that once the solar farm is approved, there is no financial incentive for the developer to annex the property into the City because it will cost them more in taxes. Mr. Krutz noted that the solar field did not include the entire 2,600 acres that is adjacent to this parcel, so there is additional land that is part of the same holdings that does not have a use assigned. Mayor Martini said the incentive to annex later is that if they have acres not being used by the solar farm, if they want a different land use designation, they have to annex into the City, because you can’t subdivide property that is in the sphere of influence. Mr. Rundle stated that the City can also add parcels into our annexation program to do forced annexations. Mayor Martini noted that annexing this parcel might provide incentive for all the property owners to get together and cooperate on a plan. Council Member Ratti asked if there way anything that would preclude the developer from coming forward with another annexation request in the future, if the Council chose to deny this request. It was noted that other than the cost, there was nothing that would prevent the applicant from doing so. Council Member Schmitt suggested postponing the decision on this annexation until we could talk with the applicant to determine why he is not present. Council Member Smith said he would like to hear from the applicant. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding this proposed ordinance. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. Council Member Carrigan stated he also wanted to hear from the applicant because he was hearing rumors regarding foreclosures on the land and bank deals and/or something about if this annexation does not go forward, the whole solar farm financing goes away.


Page 10 of 10

Council Member Ratti said that a postponement of this item would not change anything because if we can’t make the findings, we can’t make the findings, regardless of whether or not there is a foreclosure. There is a process in place for approving annexations and we should follow that process. That being said, if the rest of the Council wanted to postpone this item, then she would withdraw her motion. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to continue the second reading and public hearing on Bill No. 2610, PCN09018, to the meeting scheduled for September 14, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried. 9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 4:09:19 p.m.) Councilman Ron Smith commended the late Dennis Thurman for his work on the Sparks Advisory Committee for the Disabled, stating he will be missed. 10. Adjournment (Time: 4:10:23 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:10 p.m. ______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________

City Clerk

>>>

CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP Monday August 31, 2009

Sparks Police Department 1701 E. Prater Way, Sparks, NV 89434

1. *Call to Order by Mayor Martini at 9 am The Sparks City Council Workshop was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 9:00 a.m. 2. *Roll Call: Mayor Martini, City Clerk Patterson, Council members – Julia Ratti, Philip Salerno, Ron Smith,

Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. ABSENT: None.

Staff: Steve Driscoll, Steve Asher, Randy Mellinger, Neil Krutz, Andy Flock, Teresa Gardner, Jeff

Cronk, Frank Frievalt, Steve Keefer, Stan Sherer, Chris Syverson, Adam Mayberry *Comments from the Public: None 3. Update and discussion of current status of the City City Manager Shaun Carey summarized the day’s agenda by asking, as the Council looks at the

future (keeping in mind the downsizing of the city), are the priorities correct? The Strategic Plan is a seven-to-ten year forecast. The Environmental Scan, Cascading 5’s and Performance Measures illustrated in the packet show how the resource have been spent. Staff is here to answer any questions as needed. Mr. Carey introduced Erica Olsen, today’s facilitator, and challenged the City Council to talk about the “undiscussables.”

He stated that today the budget is not the primary focus. Rather, today is to focus on how to steer

the City into the future. Sales taxes were down in June 2009 and there is a threat on the horizon for lower property values and property tax revenues for next fiscal year. The tax rolls are closed and will stay steady through June 2010. The more volatile issue is sales tax revenues. The challenge is to be proactive for the upcoming budget.

Facilitator Erica Olsen reviewed expected outcomes:

• Come to consensus on City priorities for staff to correctly allocate time and budget, knowing we have to do more with less. • Agreement and consensus that we are all working towards the same goals • Discuss and clarify a path forward on Victorian Square and economic incentives • Strategize how to get council members on the same page regarding the consolidation threat

Ground rules:

• Stay focused on city’s civic purpose (what-not how) • Need to hear from everyone • Reach informal consensus • No need to wordsmith • Not “and;” it is “or” – If we add something, we need to take something away. • Assume positive intent

��

��

�

3.1 2009 Cascading 5s Council member Schmitt stated that staff should be commended for the hard work done and

accomplished in light of the cuts in budget. Council member Julia Ratti asked if there are functions in Community Development that should be

pulled out and maintained without construction as the driver. Neil Krutz stated that advanced planning and code enforcement are both General Fund programs. The building permits section is an enterprise function, but the city is required to maintain this function, even if there is no building going on within the community.

Councilman Mike Carrigan asked if the Enterprise Fund can be dissolved and have everything back

under the umbrella of the General Fund. Neil Krutz noted that the investment to create the Enterprise Fund was notable. After discussion this year, it was determined that the General Fund would extend a line of credit to the Enterprise Fund rather than return the function back to the General Fund. It may be time to review this issue. Mayor Martini asked for staff to provide the costs to move the Enterprise Fund back to the General Fund to determine if that would have advantages over our current model.

Council member Ron Schmitt noted there is a push being made to consolidate Community

Development from the building community. There has been a call to all builders to report the horror stories of working with Reno, Sparks and Washoe County to the Chamber of Commerce. The Reno-Sparks Chamber is doing this review and will report back on the outcomes. The development community is looking for a cheaper way to do business.

Council member Mike Carrigan stated that another place for possible review is Regional Planning.

Is this a place we can save money? It served its purpose when building was at its peak, but the atmosphere has changed and the need is much reduced. Council woman Julia Ratti asked where the other agencies are on this issue. It is a Legislative matter, but we might be able to reduce the amount of investment. Community Development has reduced 75% of staff, but Regional Planning has not reduced any staff. Washoe County has a budget of $800,000,000 and pays $365,000 to Regional Planning. Sparks’ budget is $70,000,000 and Sparks pays $365,000 as well. How do we change the amount of funding to Regional Planning (state law or interlocal)? Policy makers voted at Regional Planning Governing Board to follow staff’s budget direction and only cut the organizational allotment.

Council member Julia Ratti asked about the Public Works sustainability issue and noted that this

atmosphere has changed as well. She voiced concerned whether we have the staff resources to take advantage of the opportunities from the federal stimulus monies.

Councilman Mike Carrigan asked that we look at ways to control the city’s escalating benefits plan

costs. The other issue is the “Home Rule” subject. A summit in October is being planned by the League of Cities at their conference.

3.2 2009 Environmental Scan In reviewing the 2009 Environmental Scan, Councilwoman Julia Ratti asked why the General Fund

per capita is lower in City of Sparks than other cities in Nevada. Manager Shaun Carey explained that this is an ongoing problem. There are real tax differences in southern Nevada and northern

��

��

�

Nevada. This can be tied back to our residential nature and the lack of sales and gaming taxes to make up the differences in population and tax formulas.

Mayor Martini asked about the devaluation in assessed valuation. Shaun Carey explained that

growth stopped and the assessor has reduced property values across the city (especially in Spanish Springs). Last year we projected an 11% decrease and based upon tax protests, he lowered the assessed valuations by 15%. We will probably see another 10% drop in property tax assessments in July 2010. This will be 10% to our property tax revenues – about $2 million.

Councilman Schmitt asked about fuel tax and how Washoe County vs. the cities affects distribution.

Mr. Carey stated that Washoe County has done a few things to invest in city streets through the Regional Transportation Commission. Mr. Schmitt stated that his concern is that staff and Council must know the facts and numbers to recite as we explain issues to the public, press and legislature. He asked that a brochure be supplied so Council has background information.

Councilman Smith asked about the franchise fees flat-line chart. Mr. Carey reported that this

reduction is due to home foreclosure vacancies and people conserving energy. Our street light bill is $2 million per year and there is a cost of $138,000 to support the energy needs at the Police Department building. Franchise fees have been increased effectively for garbage revenues. The fees for hauling of construction waste will begin in October through a special business license fees. Council will be supplied with the 2009 franchise fee revenues in time for 2010 budget decisions.

Councilman Smith stated that we need to challenge the REMSA contract to find a solution to the

costs associated with our subsidy of EMS calls. He asked that staff work with the three entities and ask the Board of Health to hold REMSA responsible to respond to this. Councilwoman Ratti stated that there is not a united view on the Board of Health to change the REMSA contract.

Councilman Smith asked that we review our policy of rolling a Fire truck on every emergency call.

Councilman Schmitt asked what our options are (Can we charge for our calls?). Councilman Salerno stated that a call has been made with no response of another provider. The premise is that we do the same thing as always, we will pay for 5000 calls a year. What liabilities do we inherit if REMSA goes bankrupt? There has not been a response to this question from the District Attorney.

Mr. Adams stated that NV law gives the opportunity to create our own health district. The term

“first responder,” has a practical meaning and it also is a legal term which means the “authorized party” to respond. We are not legally obligated to be a first responder and cannot charge for our first responder calls, unless we set up our own health district. A policy decision can say we are not going to send out EMS. We have a large investment in trained people in our Fire Department but we have no contractual requirement.

Councilman Schmitt asked what sales tax projections for the coming year are. Mr. Carey noted that

we estimated a slight increase, but the danger comes if Washoe County’s projections of more decreases are correct. If we have another year-over-year fall, we will be in an even more detrimental situation. Councilman Schmitt asked, what solutions do we have to find stability? Mr. Carey noted that police officer per 1,000 population is at the lowest possible amount. If there are further cuts in this staffing, there will be crucial decision-making required. The daunting task of the upcoming budget will be about deciding which city services to maintain.

��

��

�

We could make a fundamental decision to not roll on emergency calls. If we don’t provide fire services in the City of Sparks anymore – our City Charter says we must provide a Fire Chief, does the County then have to provide services? The Truckee Meadows Fire Service has 46 cents of property taxes paid by County residents. There is no additional police tax? What services does our Charter state we must provide to our citizens?

Councilman Carrigan asked what percentage of EMS calls are life threatening? Chief Flock noted

that this is built on a tiered system and we mitigate the situation prior to REMSA’s arrival. Councilwoman Ratti asked if the numbers noted in the Environmental Scan for police include the

six new police officers (the answer is no; these new officers will bring the per capita number up to 1.22). She asked for the per capita numbers for other issues (i.e., Code Enforcement, City Clerk’s Office, etc., even compared to last year and even external standards).

3.3 2009 ICMA Performance Measures – Not discussed. 4. Discussion and possible direction on Sparks Strategic Plan and Sustainability Plan

I. Create a balanced community • Enhance opportunities for attainable housing in Sparks

Councilwoman Ratti noted that there has been a suggestion that we need to create a regional housing commission. Mr. Schmitt asked for a vacancy rates in Sparks housing. There was discussion on offering a full range of affordable housing that addresses economics and employment opportunities (seniors/low income) (move to 5th priority).

• Develop partnerships with all educational stakeholders Councilman Carrigan stated that it is time to sit down with the new Superintendent (invite

him to a Council meeting) and review development plans for schools. It was suggested also that review the possible changes in the Transit Oriented District and what affect this will have on the urban core schools (i.e., closing of Robert Mitchell School).

II. Become a Strong influential Leader in formation of economic/political policy

Councilman Schmitt stated that public education is one of the most important issues in this strategic goal.

Councilman Salerno stated that the most difficult areas to impact are the state and federal

levels. He noted that the Nevada League of Cities is the place to optimize impact. Council member Smith stated he would like to increase lobbying efforts at the State level. Council member Ratti stated that she believes successful advocacy is based upon building

relationships. Our tone is horrific when we talk about advocacy and we need to look at becoming proactive and productive with the folks who are at the legislature. She also noted that our constituents need to know that money is being spent appropriately.

Councilman Schmitt asked about Council’s appetite to get involved with the Nevada League of

Cities. An agenda item will be presented at the September 14th meeting asking that we pay $18,000+ (20% reduction) for membership in the State organization. Mayor Martini stated that the NV League of Cities were not there at this year’s legislature when Sparks needed them.

��

��

�

Councilman Carrigan asked what bang we are getting for our buck. It was agreed that the City Council needs to identify a policy to deal with State level issues.

Councilman Schmitt stated that he is willing to take the City membership in the Nevada League

of Cities off the table and move forward with something else that is more productive. We need to do more prep work and proactive in calling the legislators on the carpet when they do things that are detrimental to the City. Councilman Carrigan stated that the Legislative Committee works well, but many times they were not supported by other agencies and the League. Councilwoman Ratti noted that we could have done a better job with identifying critical items to Sparks.

Mr. Carey stated that we need to look at the State legislature to build influence and that will be

difficult with the current tools. The Legislature is so important that Council needs to build influence with our counterparts in the south. Council members must be more involved if we are to protect Sparks’ interests. The League of Cities can be made better if Council got involved and demanded that it improve performance. We don’t have the ability to work with the Big 5 cities due to sales tax issues and, therefore, have lost our influence.

III. Establishing a strong presence of tourism, art, culture and history to attract visitors and

enhance their experience, while promoting business in Sparks. 1. Implement branding efforts and outcome of Branding Leadership Team Councilwoman Ratti voiced concern about spending money on branding with the given

economic climate. Councilman Smith noted this will be implemented throughout the next five years and the money will come through utilizing the normal upgrading to integrate the new brand (i.e., business cards, street signs, etc.).

Ms. Ratti stated she has not seen a final plan and if the entire plan is inconsistent with our

resources, the money may not be meaningful to make impact. Adam Mayberry stated that Stand alone components can be put into effect and the plan will be brought to Council on

October 12th for adoption. Ms. Ratti stated she has a concern about maintaining our Special Events as they stand today. We need to understand the economics of our events (i.e., Farmer’s Market/revisit and evaluate). Councilman Schmitt noted that UNR will be reporting on the economic issues of the Special Events.

Council member Ron Smith stated that the idea is to get people downtown to spend money.

Council member Ratti advised that, in her opinion, the city has not fully embraced the logo and that the community is expecting to have a conversation about the branding. Councilman Ron Smith stated that the Branding Leadership Team (BLT) is the public and the reason that we’ve gotten this far is that we have had a community meetings.

Councilman Salerno asked if the BLT is going to take the plan regionally. Adam Mayberry

responded that the BLT will be working with the RSCVA, City of Reno and all regional agencies. We are trying to create a unique identity for the City of Sparks to become a more global influence. We will always remain the Rail City. There is outside influence coming in and the RSCVA will be creating a new brand for the region. Mayor Martini stated that we cannot answer all of these questions today.

��

��

�

Councilman Carrigan stated that we turned the branding effort over to the BLT and decided that the City would not drive the train – We need to look more globally. Mr. Carrigan asked what we want to get out of our special events. Do we want to just have a place for our citizens to have a good time? Mr. Carrigan stated that in this economic environment that is the number one priority. He stated that more people have told him they like Farmer’s Market than any other event because it is cheap and some place to go to have a good time.

IV. Ensure Sparks’ prosperity today and into the future by serving as a catalyst for economic

development and redevelopment through innovative business incentives and aggressive marketing strategies to engage local, national and global partnerships

2. Explore new economic incentives for the 2011 Legislative session Discussion centered on the fact that economic development falls onto local government. We are

not currently collecting impact fees because we are not building anything. If we can find a way to postpone/abate impact fees and get the market moving and encouraging jobs, sales tax, etc. Councilman Schmitt stated that if we can find a way to generate increased construction by not doing impact fees it will generate sales tax revenues that provides dollars we can use right away. There was consensus that Council would like to review impacts that are under Sparks’ control and create incentives for opening businesses and creating jobs. Mr. Carey noted that it may be too difficult to create change at the 2011 Legislature session in this area. It was agreed that this action plan needs to be about creating jobs.

3. Focus on revitalization of existing big-box commercial buildings and vacant lots Councilman Carrigan stated that there is no money to do anything with this goal. Randy

Mellinger noted that revitalization of big-box commercial buildings will be focused within the TOD corridor. He stated that the plan is to do a public outreach with developers to highlight our new standards, advantages and opportunities for these areas. It was consensus to keep this goal in the plan.

4. Establish Wi-Fi infrastructure Mr. Carey noted that they may be an opportunity in stimulus dollars for the local technology

infrastructure. 5. Discussion and possible direction on Resource Allocations Shaun Carey reviewed the Sparks Performance Pyramid that provides three areas of attack the

future of Sparks: great city services; the Strategic Plan (proving long range planning (three to five years ahead) and Resource Allocations as the third opportunity to create change in the city through the priorities of the City Council. Many times a government can get trapped in where it uses resources and this third planning tool becomes the change agent to begin moving resources towards the collective priorities of the Council.

Mr. Carey explained that these allocation topics are in strategic priority, however, the staff did

add back “financial stability” as an allocation due to the economic climate. Councilman Carrigan stated in January that financial stability is always job one. Mr. Carey stated that staff wanted to create a focus because we have dug such a hole, through the Legislature removing the resources that were previously used for capital funding.

��

��

�

The City Manager continued his overview, explaining that the third allocation is about quality of life. This is where we create the edge, or difference between ourselves and our competition. It is having a better quality of life, so people choose to business, live and play here. The Council has long wanted to manage within our infrastructure and much of the earlier part of this decade was spent chasing adequate road funding with franchise fees and tolls going on to many of our utilities and getting Washoe County and RTC to address that. Council started a great strategic initiative where we were going to take 10% of our revenues from growth and put that into capital. That is what resulted in the Larry D. Johnson Community Center and how we were going to build City Hall, and maintenance yard. We are now longer in a growth mode, so there isn’t 10% to grow from, but that is one where our infrastructure for civic ability is greatly challenged today.

Sustainability is the opportunity for positioning our city not to miss this wave that’s here, but

also to position our ability to provide the services. Sustainability goes beyond dollars and cents. Council has always had a great commitment to neighborhoods and that is why your Community

Development Block Grant monies have gone into schools. You’ve worked make sure that the appearance of our city includes attractive neighborhoods. Today, we don’t have the resources to put into code enforcement to protect against the blight of foreclosed homes. Councilman Schmitt has been a great advocate for increasing citizen participation with government.

Mr. Carey explained that these allocations were selected by senior staff based upon the budget

discussions from January. These opportunities from the Performance Pyramid are scheduled to be accomplished in one to two year timeframes. An example from the budget meetings in January, the Council stated we should take more time explaining public safety awareness. Police Chief Asher has conducted several town hall meetings in effort and spending resources to increase this awareness.

1. Promote public safety, health and well-being of our residents. Councilman Smith stated that the Public Safety Sales Tax team may create a Political Action

Committee if we can get this as an advisory question next year, however, they don’t want to hurry into it. He stated that the fact remains we won’t get our police or fire departments where we need them to be without separate funding. The City of Reno and Washoe County may join this effort as we move it forward. Code Enforcement officers will be included in this ballot question which is anticipated to add a 1/4 cent sales tax, which will generate $3.6 million for public safety.

2. Strive for financial stability while providing services to the city Mr. Carey explained that staff expressly put this back into the Resource Allocations as a goal

due to the economic issues we are facing and the City Council may determine not to keep this in the Strategic Plan. He explained the four objectives for this goal include: • Maintain contingency balance equal to 2% of General Fund expenditures – In the past

budget year, our contingency went from $1.3 million to $625,000. There may be more difficult times ahead and we need a policy that sets a goal for this “new normal” challenging time.

• Maintain ending general fund balance of 8.3% - The Council approved a variance from this policy to a lower balance of 5% because of the rapid descent of sales tax revenues. We

��

��

�

think we need to look at this in five-year modes and to research opportunities to set targets by functions. Councilman Schmitt asked that we look carefully at where monies were being spent by department, noting that 63% of resources are currently spent in public safety. If revenues do not provide the fuel for current services as we continue to make cuts, what kind of city are we? Last year the Council chose to fund Parks & Recreation (i.e., pools) because you felt it was so important to what Sparks is (family). If you look at a city that has more and more of its budget consumed by public safety, you begin to get out of balance.

• Allocate a minimum of 2% of general fund expenditures to capital projects – We are not in debt as a city (a little over 1% of revenues currently goes to pay debt). We have our sales tax effort that is stable and in place to take care of the items you wish to do (Larry D. Johnson, Golden Eagle, etc.). Beyond this, the Legislature did take the balance of the nickel property tax that came our way. Next year’s budget will be challenging – carpets, windows, etc., will have to be addressed as our aging facilities continue to need repair and updates. The Council voting system is an example of a failing system.

• Increase financial stabilization to 3% of general fund expenditures – We started this effort in 2005 and we believe that building a stabilization fund in this tax structure is very important because this valley [economic downturn] that we’ve walked into is liable to yo-yo for awhile.

Councilman Salerno voiced concern about allocations to capital projects in this economic climate. Mr. Carey stated that our level of investment in capital projects has been where we have deferred in difficult times. Now that the State has taken property tax revenues away from local governments, we have, in essence, lost half a million dollars. This will take our spending on capital projects essentially to zero. Unless we build a goal and target to put money back into capital spending, separate from contingency, we are going to have some big holes. A roof is going to fail. A major pump is going to go out – major things that cannot be deferred. These physical buildings that we have require continued maintenance and investment (this is not building new buildings). This is a goal for repairing current assets. As an example, the power system in the Legislative Building [built 45 years ago] was not designed for power uses and demands it has today. These are the types of issues that our Public Works and Finance Departments are trying to set good financial policy to wedge in capital spending. With zero capital, and total spending for maintaining city services on the people part, you will have more and more attacks on contingency as they things fail.

Councilman Carrigan stated that stability based upon sales tax will never be stable so there is a need to go back to the Legislature to bring about stability through property tax (sale of house – tax goes back to 100%).

3. Enhance its quality of life through redevelopment, strategic planning, implementation and economic growth

• Implementation of the amended development and disposition agreement and public financing bond issues with RED Development and the Legend’s DDFA

��

��

�

Councilman Schmitt stated that we cannot stop working on jobs. Council discussed ways to provide an opportunity for a developer to bring another attraction like an arena (cost: $40 million and up) to the Marina area. Mr. Carey noted that the best outcome will be to approach this from a regional perspective here in Washoe County and pursue it at the Legislature and on the federal list for 2011. Mr. Schmitt stated that this is largely out of Sparks’ control as we do not have $40 million but to put it on a federal priority list, with no downsides, makes sense. Council member Ratti stated that she would support this as long as it does not cause the loss of another project (i.e., Larry Johnson, Pyramid Hwy, etc.) • Redefine the direction for Victorian Square • Adopt the Master plan revisions • Implement the Transit Oriented District (TOD) in older areas of the city • Implement regional and city branding There was consensus that all of these action plans were on target.

4. Manage resources to keep pace with infrastructure and sustainability needs

• Keep pace with infrastructure needs • Identify “Green” infrastructure technologies • Maintain, rehabilitate and develop sewer, storm drain, effluent systems, city facilities

and TMWRF • Maintain, rehabilitate and develop park systems • Maintain and manage roadway and signal systems • Continue to find innovative transportation system improvements • Reduce the threat to our community through Flood Damage Reduction

There were no changes to these action plans. 5. Have great neighborhoods in which to live, work and play through the maintenance

of the appearance of the city. • Increase reactive code enforcement capabilities

Councilman Schmitt suggested that code enforcement be included in the public safety tax initiative (27 police officers, 9 fire fighters and 3 code enforcement officers).

• Support strong preservation of neighborhood character through design standards, code enforcement and community involvement

6. Encourage our citizens to interact with their city government.

• Interaction with City government • Manage volunteer program • Utilize social media to interact with citizens • Enhance Sparks’ Citizen Advisory Committee (SCAC) • Some members feel they’re losing something • Education citizens on government (state and local) • Utilize focus groups • Provide budgeting reports to the public • Promote outcomes of performance on public safety, parks, etc.

6. Discussion of Economic Development Incentives (will be redirected to a workshop).

��

��

�

7. Discussion and Overview of Victorian Square

Mr. Carey discussed the feasibility of plan. There is a stakeholder meeting coming. We need to attract developer #7. We are in the process of building the infrastructure for the development (roads, acquired property) based upon the RTKL plan. We have acquired Pacific Pawnbrokers parcel and doing environmental work on the Simons parcel. The two parcels next to the Simons parcel are owned by the Nugget and we need to acquire those parcels. We also need to close out discussions on the right-of-way for where we put the road around the fountain. At the Sept 14th meeting an agenda item will be presented for the street project and go out to bid this fall. On the financial side we can work on a pay-as-you-go-basis. This would leave a fund balance of $550,000 or opportunity of an extension of the financing tool with Bank of America (which would give $1.6 to $1.8 million). Agency Chairman Ron Smith noted that when we built the road around the fountain, we actually built on property belonging to the Nugget, which is important to correct. Consolidating this property will make it feasible for a developer to come in and do a project. He stated that he has contacted four different businesses who desire to be in the downtown area. The bidding climate is exceptional and we can build this road for half the cost in normal times. Agency Vice-Chair Julia Ratti stated that she is in agreement that we are halfway through a step that is cleaning up this space of building on the Nugget’s property and separating these parcels out so they are developable, individually or as a whole. We have fourteen years left on the life of the Redevelopment Plan. We may find out that we cannot complete this as a big project, but rather as a parcel at a time. There is potential momentum of Arts Space (Sierra Arts) which is an exciting aspect of the project at this time. Mr. Carrigan stated that segmenting parcels (problem is ownership of property & parcels) are the major obstacle to completing this project. He asked that we get a developer prior to building the road. We are working to take ownership of the property that the road was built upon to ensure that the transactions are completed. Julia Ratti stated that she is advocating for us to continue to remove the barriers to development. The first goal is to clean up the transactions we’ve started, so if someone wanted to come and develop, they could. Councilman Schmitt noted that he will support building the road however he is concerned that one property downtown that requests tax abatement and the Redevelopment Area is upside down financially. Mayor Martini stated there are two items to consider: It isn’t going to get any cheaper to build the road and we have already committed to build the road. There will be a brainstorming session next month to talk about the direction. Councilman Carrigan asked who the development of Victorian Square will benefit. Mr. Carrigan noted that Redevelopment is suppose to be an economic engine to update older sections of the city, but this has not happened in either of our Redevelopment areas. Councilman Smith stated that it will benefit all of us by improving tax increment and jobs.

��

��

�

Facilitator Erica Olsen summarized two discussion points: We want the whole plan, not just the piece of a plan and another suggestion is to begin by removing the barriers to development by building the road and cleaning up the parcels. Mr. Carey noted that if there is consensus to unite behind a plan to build the road, which accomplishes the plan that we’ve already set in motion, we will have a brainstorming session to gain support for the community anew for united planning for the future. This will be better served by meeting with developers, finding out what will work in this economy, getting ownerships for a developer in that process. We need to move forward with promises we’ve already made and then step back and say where we can move forward together. Agency Chair Ron Smith stated that we are looking at all options with the focus now on retail. The Agency will not be part of this brainstorming session – the developers are going to do it. The plan will be brought back to the Agency for approval. 8. Comments: Mayor Martini thanked Erica Olsen for her work.

The meeting was adjourned at 3:10 p.m.

��

��

�

Mandated Services: First Responder Issue

REMSA Performance Vender options? Review our policy to respond to emergency calls Joint meeting with other entities

What services are we providing that we can do without? Economy driven Reduction

Budget Shortfall: Mgmt Decisions – Having a cheat sheet ICMA Benchmarking for service levels (staff per…) Home Rule Revenues options Review Benefits Package Stimulus $$ - Position/staff need to take advantage (What goes away to give $$ to this?) Community Development Identify required functions (statute & chartered) Enterprise vs. General fund Consolidation CD vs. Regional Planning

On hold (NRS - $ amount)

Strong Influential Leader Public education

Are we doing enough? Is out message getting out there? That $$ is well spent

Local Council’s ability to attend conferences/training

State Needs work Need to start supporting those who think like us/those who support us\ Increase lobbying efforts Need to start building relationships NV League of Cities/Stay or not renew?

Page 1 of 9

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 3:00 P.M. Monday, September 14, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:01:23 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:02 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:01:28 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt (present via phone), Assistant City Manager Randy Mellinger, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Council Member Ron Smith, City Manager Shaun Carey, ABSENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:01:49 p.m.) The invocation was given by Pastor Ron Arnold from Our Savior Lutheran Church. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:02:53 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Phil Salerno. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:03:26 p.m.) Mayor Martini asked for a moment of silence for Soldier Thomas Lyons, who lost his life in Iraq this past week. Dorris Phelps from the Northern Nevada Food Bank presented the City with a commendation in recognition of the City’s efforts in collecting donations during the “Peanut Butter Challenge.” The food drive was a great success and they collected a total of 22 boxes of peanut butter (40 jars per box). Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:05:28 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. It was noted that Item 8.2 would be continued. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: 3.1 Regular Meeting of August 10, 2009, and August 24, 2009 (Time: 3:09:24

p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meetings of August 10, 2009, and August 24, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Proclamation – National Hispanic Heritage Month (Time: 3:13:30 p.m.)

Regular City Council Meeting Minutes for September 14, 2009 �

Page 2 of 9

Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming September 2009, as National Hispanic Heritage Month in recognition of cultural traditions of the Hispanic-American community and their impact upon American society. The proclamation was accepted by Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson on behalf of the MAC (Multi-cultural Awareness Committee). 5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:09:39 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.14. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

5.1 Report of Claims and Bills approved for payment and the appropriation transfers are for the period August 6, 2009, through August 26, 2009



for Winners Gaming, Inc., dba Paddy & Irene’s Irish Pub, located at 906 Victorian Ave., Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Robert Gene King

An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council approve a Gaming License for Paddy & Irene’s Irish Pub. Winner’s Gaming is a licensed Slot Route Vendor with several current gaming licenses in Sparks. The license will provide a $720.00 annual fee for six multi-denominational, bar-top slot machines; contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.

5.3 Consideration and possible approval of recommendation to refund permit

fees to Centex Homes for permits A0900075 – A0900082 An agenda item from Community Development Director Neil Krutz recommending the City Council approve a refund of building permit fees to Centex Homes in the amount of $7,465.50. Centex Homes has merged with Pulte Homes and a decision was made not to complete construction of one building containing eight Wildcreek Townhomes. A refund has been requested because inspections will not be performed on this structure.


license fees for Hoskin & Muir, Inc. An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending the City Council approve a refund of the overpayment of business license fees for 2008 to Hoskin & Muir, Inc., in the amount of $658.99.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of a business license penalty refund for

TNG Sparks, LLC, dba Holiday Inn An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending the City Council approve a refund of a business license fee penalty to Holiday Inn, in the amount of $781.06. Accounting Manager Elaine Cain wrote that they sent the check in without the application and when the City received the check, it was applied to the sewer account, not the business license. When they realized the error, they paid the business license fees and the penalty. They are now asking for a refund of the penalty that was paid.


Page 3 of 9

5.6 Consideration and possible acceptance of donation from the 2009 Justice

Assistance Grant in the amount of $53,233.00 An agenda item from Police Chief Steve Asher recommending the City Council accept funding under the Justice Assistance Grant program. The Police Department intends to use the money to pay for training and equipment that would not be possible without the use of grand funds.

5.7 Consideration and possible acceptance of grant agreement from the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for funding provided via the Community Development Block Grant program under the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009

An agenda item from Grants Administrator Tracy Wheeler recommending the City Council accept a grant from HUD which will be used to rehabilitate the curb, gutter, and sidewalks along Zephyr Way, between 16th and 18th Streets. This project was included in the City’s CIP list of needed street repairs. This project was selected based upon its location in a low-income area, meeting the low and moderately-low income area benefit under the Suitable Living Environment objective and Sustainability outcome.

5.8 Review and possible approval of the 2009/2010 Children’s Cabinet, Inc.,

Memorandum of Agreement in the amount of $38,062.80 effective July 1, 2009, to June 30, 2010

An agenda item from Recreation Superintendent Tracy Domingues recommending the City Council approve an agreement with the Children’s Cabinet for funding of Before and After School child care for low-income citizens.

5.9 Consideration and possible award of the 1212 to 1216 Victorian Avenue

(Simons Building) Asbestos Abatement and UST Removal Project to Advance Installations, Inc., CIP 9067, in the amount of $46,123.00

An agenda item from Capital Projects Coordinator Brian Cason recommending the City Council award the informal quote for asbestos abatement to Advance Installations. The city purchased the building as part of the Victorian Square redevelopment project. Testing showed the presence of asbestos which must be removed prior to demolition of the building. An existing underground storage tank will also be removed as part of this project. Funding was budgeted in the CIP for this project.

5.10 Consideration and possible approval of the 21st Century Community

Learning Centers Grant as entered into and secured through the collaborative efforts with Alice Maxwell, Robert Mitchell, Lincoln Park, Agnes Risley, and Kate Smith Elementary Schools

An agenda item from Recreation Superintendent Tracy Domingues recommending the City Council approve a grant agreement for continued enrichment activities provided by the City through the Twilight Academy which is held after school on all school days at each school. Last year approximately 150 students received these services, which include activities from dance to sports and self-esteem builders, as well as homework support. This contract is the third year of a five year grant that is reviewed on a yearly basis and provides for the salaries of the part-time workers who teach the programs.


Page 4 of 9

5.11 Consideration and possible approval of an engineering Services Agreement

Amendment #2 to Shaw Engineering for the Spanish Springs Interceptor Project (Phases 3 and 4) in the amount of $168,708 for a total contract of 42,595,389 (Agreement A-3103)

An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel recommending the City Council approve the second amendment to the contract with Shaw Engineering for materials testing which was not included in the original scope of services and which has been provided by a third-party consultant in past phases of this project. Some of the additional cost is also for additional survey work for expanded project limits. Funds are available for this additional work.

5.12 Consideration and possible approval of an agreement to purchase Victorian

Light Poles and Bollards to be installed with the East Victorian Avenue (Pyramid Way to McCarran Boulevard) Project from Great Basin Lighting, Inc., in the amount of $276,848.00

An agenda item from Traffic Engineer Jon Ericson recommending the City Council approve an agreement to purchase light poles and bollards for inclusion in the RTC East Victorian Avenue Project. The City entered into an interlocal agreement with RTC for rehabilitation of Victorian Avenue and the light poles, bollards landscape trees, and tree grates will be purchased by the City and installed by the contractor for the RTC project. The poles and bollards will be purchased from the City’s sole source provider, Great Basin Lighting. Funds were budgeted for this purchase.

5.13 Consideration and possible approval of the 16th Street Alley Rehabilitation

Project to Stampede Construction Inc., in the amount of $59,625.00 An agenda item from Transportation Manager Jon Ericson recommending the City Council award the informal bid to Stampede Construction. The rehabilitation includes removal and replacement of deteriorated asphalt pavement, concrete valley gutter, and installation of a handicap ramp. Funds were budgeted for this alley rehabilitation project.

5.14 Consideration and possible approval of the purchase of plant mix from

Granite Construction Company in the amount of $170,000 during FY 09/10 An agenda item from Public Works Maintenance Manger Mike Biselli recommending the City Council approve the purchase of plant mix from Granite Construction as a sole source provider. The plant mix will be purchased on an “as needed” basis for various scheduled maintenance projects. Funds are available in the street account for this purchase.


6.1 Consideration and possible approval of a professional services agreement with CHG and Associates for federal legislative representation and contract lobbyist services (Time: 3:10:23 p.m.)

Government Affairs Manager Rob Joiner noted that the current contract with CHG expires on November 30, 2009. CHG has provided lobbyist services for the City on a federal level since 2003. Mr. Joiner noted that the staff report contained a list of some of the funding that the City has garnered with the assistance of Ms. Anja Graves and CHG Associates. Staff had negotiated


Page 5 of 9

a contract for fees, terms, and conditions for an initial two-year period, with an option for additional two-year period. Ms. Graves has agreed to no increase in the cost of the contract. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve a professional services contract with CHG and Associates for providing federal legislative representation and contract lobbyist services on behalf of the City, as recommended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.2 Discussion and possible action on Sparks’ Legislative Platform and Policies –

October 2009 through September 2010 (Time: 3:13:15 p.m.) Government Affairs Manager Rob Joiner noted that this is the annual review of our policies and platform document, which we have done since 2006. He said this document serves to assist staff in monitoring our state and federal program and guides staff in communication procedures. He said that due to budget constraints they have taken out the references to our state lobbyist, Rocky Finseth, because we terminated that contract in January. References to the Urban Consortium (Big 5) have also been taken out because that group no longer exists as of last year. Mr. Joiner stated the Key Issues are outlined on page two of the document. Council Member Ratti asked that one more key issue be added—redevelopment and neighbourhood revitalization.

6.3 Consideration and possible adoption of Resolution No. 3162 to recognize the Sparks Citizens Advisory Committee (SCAC) and begin to appoint SCAC Members (Time: 3:21:36 p.m.)

Community Relations Manager Adam Mayberry introduced the current Chair of the SCAC, Keith Primus and noted that in 1999, there was a resolution that formalized the committee and since then membership has been very fluid. Recently there has been discussion regarding making the advisory committee more effective and he was tasked with finding a way to do this. He noted that this resolution is the first step in making the advisory committee more effective. Council Member Carrigan asked if they could appoint an alternate for the two committee members they appoint. Mr. Mayberry said this sounded like a good idea. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to adopt Resolution No. 3162, amended to allow the appointment of an alternate in each Ward, to recognize the Sparks Citizens Advisory Committee and appoint members to the SCAC. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.4 First Reading and possible discussion of Bill No. 2611, amending the Sparks

Municipal Code relating to the exercise of first amendment rights on public property; declaring that the City has a substantial governmental interest in regulating certain matters on public property; clarifying certain provisions; and providing other matters properly related thereto (Time: 3:33:42 p.m.)


Page 6 of 9

City Clerk Linda Patterson read Bill No. 2604 by title. Mayor Martini announced that the public hearing and second reading of this bill was scheduled for the regular City Council Meeting of October 12, 2009.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: 7.1 Public Hearing and possible approval of the Consolidated Plan Annual

Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for Program Year 2008 for the City of Sparks (Time: 3:34:17 p.m.)

Grants Administrator Tracy Wheeler noted that this the year-end report to HUD outlining our programs and expenditures and our participation in the HOME Consortium with the City of Reno and Washoe County. Ms. Wheeler reviewed how we spend our allocation of over $700,000 as outlined in the staff report. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to comment on the report. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve submission of the Consolidated Plan Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for Program Year 2008 for the City of Sparks. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items: 8.1 Public Hearing, PCN009019, a request from PCCP CSGF RB Portfolio,

LLC, for a Tentative amendment to the Foothills at Wingfield Springs Planned Development Handbook, to allow for the inclusion of a School designation and associated development standards on a site approximately8.1 acres in size within the NUD (The Foothills at Wingfield Springs Planned Development) zoning district generally located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Vista Boulevard and Passage Drive in the Foothills at Wingfield Springs Planned Development (Time: 3:37:24 p.m.)

Associate Planner Chere’ Jigour noted this handbook amendment changes a residential land use to a school designation on 8 acres. The Washoe County School District is the applicant for this change, as they anticipate building a new school in four to five years. The amendment includes development standards that will help integrate the school use into the existing neighborhoods and provide for a quality development in the future. She stated the development findings 1 through 21 have been met, as outlined in the staff report. The Planning Commission and staff are recommending approval of this request. Council Member Carrigan thanked all the people who worked to get this property as a school site, stating that this is a much better site then the one the School District had been looking at and it also cost the School District a lot less money for the property. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to comment on this handbook amendment.


Page 7 of 9

Mr. Andy Durling, of Wood Rogers, representing the School District, noted that they agreed with the staff recommending and he was there to answer any questions the Council may have. There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve the Tentative to approve the Tentative Foothills at Wingfield Springs Handbook – PCN09019, based on findings PD1 through PD21 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report. This tentative approval includes that the applicant shall file an application for final approval of the Planned Development Handbook within one year from the date of approval of the tentative Planned Development Handbook. Due to the nature of the tentative Planned Development a bond at this point in time as stated in NRS 278A.490 is not necessary. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

8.2 Public Hearing, PCN06077, review and possible action on a request from

Synergy Golf Holdings for Tentative Approval of an amendment to a planned development handbook (D’Andrea) to allow for the creation of an additional 72-unit village utilizing previously approved units on a site approximately 157 acres in size in the PD (Planned Development – D’Andrea) zoning district generally located east of the intersection of Vista Boulevard and North D’Andrea Parkway, Sparks, NV (Time: 3:41:04 p.m.)

Community Development Director Neil Krutz noted that this amendment would allow the creation of an additional 72 unit village that would fall within the total allotted unit count in the D’Andrea Handbook. He said it was his understanding that this item was going to be continued to the first meeting in October, and therefore he would not make a presentation, but turn the meeting back to the Council for the public hearing. Council Member Salerno asked for clarification regarding the number of units approved in the original handbook. Mr. Krutz noted that they were originally approved for 2,230 units—2,200 original and 30 units to be added at a potential school site if the School District chose not to move forward with a school, which they did. The developer is moving units around because the original land plan was not based on detailed topography and lay-out, and as they go to build the units, they find that plans have to change with the topography. He said that staff feels that this is essentially a shuffling of units around on the project and does not add any units above what was originally approved. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to comment on this handbook amendment. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. Council Member Carrigan noted that he had some questions regarding this amendment; however, he was not able to make contact with the developer prior to this meeting and therefore he is requesting that this item be continued to the next meeting to allow time for a meeting to take place.


Page 8 of 9

A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to continue PCN06077 to the meeting of October 12, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

8.3 Public Hearing, 2nd Reading, discussion and possible action of PCN09018, Bill No.

2610, an ordinance for a voluntary Annexation request, in accordance with the City of Sparks’ 7-Year Annexation Program, by Tahoe Reno Commercial Center LLC for a parcel 30.23 acres in size generally located west of the USA Parkway interchange, east of the Patrick Interchange, shares the southern property line with the right-of-way of Interstate 80 within the City of Sparks’ Sphere of Influence. Upon annexation, the zoning would convert from a Washoe County designation of Industrial to a City of Sparks zoning designation of I (Industrial). (Time: 3:44:52 p.m.)

Senior Planner Jim Rundle noted that this item was continued from the meeting of August 24, 2009, at which time the Council heard a presentation on this annexation request. He noted that the applicant was present to answer any questions the Council may have. City Attorney Adams asked for clarification on whether staff was still recommending denial of this annexation request. Mr. Rundle responded that yes, staff was still recommending denial. Mr. Rundle noted that staff was unable to make the finding that infrastructure would be provided at the time of annexation and this is why they made the recommendation of denial. Council Member Carrigan said his concern was why the applicant was asking for this parcel to be annexed when they already have a special use permit for development. Mayor Martini said his understanding was the concern was that the applicant wanted to annex the property to intensify the land use—something other than a solar farm. The managing member of the applicant group, Reno-Tahoe Commercial Center, Richard E. Robleski, stated that they may be asking for additional property to be annexed in the future because there are about 150 acres next to the freeway that is very well suited for development located directly to the west. He said that their plans for a freeway interchange have met with approval from RTC and he has plans to meet with State officials in the near future. He asked that this annexation request be continued until he has met with these officials and gathered further information in order to answer all the questions Council Members may have. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to comment on this annexation request. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. Council Member Ratti asked if the East Truckee River Plan was the only reason staff was recommending denial. Mr. Rundle stated staff’s recommendation of denial was based on the need for a plan for providing infrastructure and the appropriate sequence of annexation would be to complete an area plan which would address all the infrastructure questions before the property was annexed.


Page 9 of 9

A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to table PCN09018. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Smith, ABSENT. Motion carried.

9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 3:54:35 p.m.) Acting City Manager Randy Mellinger read a notice for openings on the Advisory Committee for the Disabled, advising that applications will be accepted through Friday, September 25, 2009. Council member Julia Ratti noted that she had attended the Boys & Girls Club Day for Kids at Ardmore Park and a Hand Washing Event for the Washoe County Health Department. Both events were exceptionally beneficial. She asked that staff review our policies regarding commercial businesses overflowing into the public right-of-ways and how we deal with this. Mayor Martini noted that the Remember 911 motor cycle event held at Cottonwood Park, hosted by the Iron Nation Motor Cycle Club, raised money for families of war victims. 10. *Adjournment (Time: 3:58:16 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:58 p.m. _______________________________ Mayor __________________________________ City Clerk >>>

Page 1 of 20

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 2:00 P.M. Monday, October 12, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 2:02:10 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 2:04 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 2:02:18 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Ron Smith, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Council Members Phillip Salerno, Mike Carrigan, ABSENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 2:58:52 p.m. This item was heard out of order.) Retired Reverend Ron Arnold gave the invocation at 2:58 p.m. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 2:02:42 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Ron Schmitt. *Comments from the Public (Time: 2:03:11 p.m.) Mayor Martini asked for a moment of silence for Private First Class Kevin C. Thompson, who lost his life in Afghanistan. Mr. Fred Barry spoke regarding the new RTC Director, asking that he keep in mind the need for public input into local projects. Ms. Pam Dickson spoke regarding the work of the Solace Tree organization that provides grief support to those who have lost a loved one. She extended an invitation to participate in their scheduled Art Auction in December, either by donating artwork or purchasing artwork at the auction. Mr. Joe Parks expressed concern regarding people removing recyclable material from bins and garbage cans after they are put out on the curb, but before Waste Management picks the contents up. He suggested that if it is not illegal, then the City of Sparks should consider making it illegal. Mr. Parks said recycle scavengers have become a problem in his neighborhood and he would be happy to work with the City regarding a solution. City Attorney Adams noted that once the trash and/or recyclable materials are put out on the curb for pick up they become the property of Waste Management and it was a misdemeanor for someone to remove anything from the containers. He also stated that Waste Management would have to file a complaint in order for the City to be able to take action against people who remove recyclables from the curb before they can be picked up. Mr. Parks commented that he was told emphatically by our Police Department that it was not illegal to remove recyclable materials from garbage cans and bins that have been put out on the curb. Council Member Smith commented that this is a problem everywhere, not just in Mr. Parks’ neighborhood and something does need to be done. Attorney Adams noted that if a police officer does see this misdemeanor taking place in his presence, he

Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting for October 12, 2009

Page 2 of 20

can issue a citation to the offender. He also noted that this is in our Municipal Code, Section 7.12.070(e). Approval of the Agenda (Time: 2:11:27 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the agenda as posted. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: 3.1 Regular Meeting of September 14 2009 (Time: 2:12:32 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 14, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Introduction of Lee Gibson, new Executive Director of the Regional Transportation Commission and update on transportation issues (Time: 2:13:08 p.m.)

The new Executive Director of the Regional Transportation Commission, Lee Gibson, noted that this week they celebrated the 30th anniversary of the RTC and they also celebrated the start of their rapid transit route along Virginia Street in Reno. Council Member Schmitt thanked Mr. Derek Morse for all he has done as the Interim Director of RTC and congratulated Mr. Gibson on his appointment.

4.2 Presentation of Exemplary Business Award to Dairy Queen of Sparks (Time:

2:18:01 p.m.) Chairman of the Sparks Advisory Committee for the Disabled Laura Sheldon-Casson noted that the Sparks Dairy Queen has completely remodeled their interior and now it is very assessable. She presented a plaque to the owner of the Dairy Queen and thanked them for their all their efforts. Mr. Thornton thanked the Committee and the Council for the recognition, stating they strive to keep their facilities up-to-date.

4.3 Proclamation – Arbor Day (Time: 2:22:00 p.m.)

Council Member Ratti read a proclamation naming October 12, 2009, as Arbor Day, in recognition of the importance of planting trees. The City of Sparks is recognized as a “Tree City USA” by the National Arbor Day Foundation.

5. Consent Items: (Time: 2:23:34 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.14. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.


Page 3 of 20

5.1 Report of Claims and Bills approved for payment and the appropriation transfers are for the period September 2, 2009, through September 23, 2009



for Winners Gaming, Inc., dba Anchors Restaurant and Lounge, located at 325 Harbour Cove Dr., Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Robert Gene King

An agenda item from Sparks Police Department recommending the City Council approve an application for a Gaming License for Anchor’s Restaurant. Winner’s Gaming is a licensed Slot Route Vendor and Mr. King is the President/Manager of slot route business. The license will provide an $840.00 annual fee for seven multi-denominational, bar-top slot machines and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.

5.3 Consideration and possible approval of an application with conditions of a

Cabaret license for Sparks Ranch West, LLC, dba Rack and Pins, located at 1330 Scheels Dr., #250, Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. David Paul Kelley

An agenda item from Sparks Police Department recommending the City Council approve an application for a Cabaret License the Rack and Pins, with conditions. Mr. Kelley is the owner of Alliance Business Services in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. The license comes with conditions negotiated between the business and the police department (see A-3782) and will provide a $1,300.00 annual fee plus $1.00 per $1,000.00 over $50,000.00 and approval is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.

5.4 Consideration and possible approval of an application with conditions of a

Cabaret license for Sparks Ranch West, LLC, dba Cadillac Ranch West, located at 1330 Scheels Dr., #250, Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. David Paul Kelley

An agenda item from Sparks Police Department recommending the City Council approve an application for a Cabaret License the Cadillac Ranch, with conditions. Mr. Kelley is the owner of Alliance Business Services in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. The license comes with conditions negotiated between the business and the police department (see A-3784) and will provide a $1,300.00 annual fee plus $1.00 per $1,000.00 over $50,000.00 and approval is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of an amendment to the agreement with

the City of Reno and Limno Tech, Inc. for additional services in the implementation of the third party review of the Truckee River Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for nutrients in an amount not to exceed $400,000 which is being funded from the Regional Water Management Fund

An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel recommending the City Council approve an amendment to A-3676 for additional services for the on-going third party review, which began in 1998.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval of the Larry D. Johnson Community Center Photovoltaic Retrofit Project Bid #09/10-008, PWP # WA-2009-383 to


Page 4 of 20

System 3 Inc., using a HUD EDI Grant, in the amount of $200,000 An agenda item from Public Works Director Wayne Seidel recommending the City Council approve a retrofit project which includes installation of a 28 kilowatt photovoltaic system on the roof of the community center. The system will provide 30% of the power needed by the building and reduce energy consumption needed by the City to operate the building. Funding is being provided by a grant and is budgeted for this project.

5.7 Consideration and possible approval of the purchase of Woolwerks Design &

Development of Sparks Police Department Website in the amount of $36,000 An agenda item from Acting Police Chief Steve Keefer recommending the City Council approve the redesign of the Police Department’s website in order to create an interactive police department website that will allow citizens to inquire into crime statistics and crime mapping. The site will incorporate a content management system which will allow for a department user to update. Funds for this project are being provided by a grant and are budgeted for this purpose.

5.8 Consideration and possible approval of the Foxboro Distribution Control

Support Agreement with Invensys Process Systems (IPS) for the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility for three years not to exceed the amount of $98,473

An agenda item from Operations Superintendent Starlin Jones recommending the City Council approve the extension of our current agreement with IPS for an additional three years for technical support of the Distributed Control System at the water treatment facility. This is a sole source agreement and will be paid for via the operations at the treatment facility, with the City of Reno reimbursing their share of the costs on a 30/70 basis.

5.9 Consideration and possible approval of the 2009 Fall Alley Rehabilitation

Project to Petersen Construction, Inc., in the amount of $37,850 An agenda item from Transportation Manager Jon Ericson recommending the City Council award the quote for the 2009 Alley Rehabilitation Project to Petersen Construction. The scope of work includes the removal and replacement of asphalt in the alleys of four individual city blocks, as outlined in the staff report. Funds were budgeted and are available for this project.

5.10 Consideration and possible approval of renewal of three-year Microsoft

Enterprise Agreement for desktop/laptop software products and client access licenses from En Pointe Technologies

An agenda item from Information Technology Manager Rick Bareuther recommending the City Council approve an amendment to A-2977 for renewal of the City’s software licensing agreement. The original agreement was approved in 2003 and renewed in 2006. This will extend the agreement an additional three years, through September, 2012. Funds were budgeted in each department for this expense.

5.11 Consideration and possible approval of Resolution No. 3163, providing for

the adoption of Local Government records retention schedules per Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) Ch. 239 and Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) 239

An agenda item from City Clerk Linda Patterson recommending the City Council adopt the State of Nevada Local Government Records Retention Schedules as recommended by the State


Page 5 of 20

Records Committee. 5.12 Consideration and possible approval of a professional consulting services

contract to PBS&J for Civil Engineering design services to complete the Maldonado Park/Vista Swales Phase II Final Design, CIP 9098, in the amount of $33.055

An agenda item from Capital Projects Coordinator Brian Cason recommending the City Council award a contract to PBS&J to design the final phase of the Maldonado Park drainage swales. This project is associated with the 2005 Flash Flood incident. Funds were budgeted for this CIP project.

5.13 Consideration and possible contract approval of design contract to Summit

Engineering, Corp. for the Hymer Avenue Storm Drain Replacement Project in the amount of $38,940 (CIP 1088)

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Shawn Gooch recommending the City Council award a design contract to Summit Engineering for the second phase of the Hymer Avenue Storm Drain Replacement Project. An earlier phase of storm drain replacement in Hymer Avenue was completed in 2004. This project will be done in conjunction with the reconstruction of Hymer by the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC). Funds are budgeted and available for this project.

5.14 Consideration and approval of a contract for Professional Services with

Wood Rodgers, Inc., for the preparation of a Public Works Design Manual for an amount not to exceed $30,000

An agenda item from Civil Engineer John Martini recommending the City Council approve a professional services contract for preparation of a manual for the design public works projects. The manual will provide minimum design specifications for the construction of roadways, storm water utilities, sanitary sewer utilities, mapping, street lighting, pedestrian ways, erosion control and storm water pollution prevention and other technical design issues. Wood Rogers was selected from the list of approved engineering firms due to their extensive local knowledge and experience with design of public works projects. Funding is available for this project.


6.1 Consideration and possible approval of the proposed City of Sparks Branding, Development, and Marketing Action Plan (Time: 2:32:32 p.m.)

Community Relations Manager Adam Mayberry, and Mr. Paul Curtis, Chairman of the Brand Leadership Team, gave a presentation regarding the Branding, Development and Marketing Action Plan for the City of Sparks as outlined below: ��

• ��

o ��

o ��

��

o � �� !��

o "��# $��%&&' ��


Page 6 of 20

o (��) ��

� ��

o �� ()��

• (��) ��

o *�� +�� *�� ,��-�

o ) �� $ ��,��.��-�

o /�� $ ��

o 0��0��

o ( �� 1 ��

o ��

o /��

o 2 �� ) � ��

o 2��0�� + ��.�� $ ��

o 3� �)�� 4 ��

o � �� +��5/�

o ��

o �� 6�� (��(� � ��

o 0 �� *+��

o � �� 2�� +7 +�*��

o +��

• (��2 � �� 7 �� /��*��

o (��.�� $ �� 8�

o 2 � �� .�� 9�� :�� $��8�

o � �� .�� ; �

o /��*��.�� .��; �

� ��$��<�� $��

��

� ��

o �� =�

� �� $ ��

� �� $ �� 4 ��

� �� $ ��

o ��<�("� �> ?<��" 1 �

� � �� 8�

• "�� !� ��

�� 8�

o (��@�� $ �=�

� (�� .�� .�1 ��

� (�� ?��9� �� :��

� (�� 6��1 <5<+�9��:��$��

� �� .$�� $�� .�� .��

$�� ?��

� )�� 1 ��$�� A��

�� $��

o ��<��*/+0��(+/12 �

� �� .�9"�!�� :�.�9"�� !�� 8:�

� � ��!�� "�� B�� $ �� !��

�� "�� $� �� $��

�� 9"�� !��

�� 8:��#��/��

� + � � $ �=�� $ ��

� �� 9 ��:�� $��


Page 7 of 20

• �

• � ��$��

o "��!�� $��

o /��$�� C� �� B� ��

o <� ��$ �� $��

• � ��#��!��$!��

o %&&'�.�%&D&=��

o %&DD�.�%&D%=��

o %&DE=�9"�!�� :�

o %&DF�.� ��=�+ ��

• %&&'�.�%&D&=�� + ��6 ��

o �� ()�!��/��

� 2 � ��

� (�� $�� + ��+��5/�

� 2 �� B�� 4��

��

� + � �� G� ��

� 2 �� C��

� *�� *+��

o $��?+)�� $��

o 2 � ��(��

o )��

o + �� +�� *��

o �� G B��

• %&DD�.�%&D%=�� *��2 � �� 6 ��

o ��

o + ��

o *��

o 2 � �� %&&� � ��

o <�� G� � ��

o 2 � ��

o 2 � �� $��

o 2 � ��

o �� 9( ��:��

o /�� G��

• %&DE=�9"�!�� :�

• %&DF�.� ��=�+ �� <��

• �� 8�

o 1�� $ �� H�

o 1��B��$ �� $ ��

��

o �� $ �� $��

�� B�� $ ��

o *�� $ ��$��

�� $ �� $�� B��

o ��!�� $ ��

� ��

• �� !��

o �� =�

� <� $�� (��

� (��) ��

• 1 B��

o 1 � ��)��


Page 8 of 20

� + ��

� � ��

� � ��$��

o ()�� 6 ��

o ()��

Council Member Smith noted that according to the recommendations from the consultant, the politicians should not be running this brand effort… it needs to be run by the local business community and the Brand Leadership Team (BLT) has done a great job doing this. Council Member Ratti stated that overall she supports the branding effort, but we need to do a better job of investing in the infrastructure and the programs and presentation of our special events and creating activity in Sparks. We are doing special events for a very specific reason—to raise our tourism profile. We also need to do a better job of telling our target segments that “It is happening in Sparks.” Ms. Ratti said she does support the overall branding effort and the reason she is emphasizing her support is because she has questions and it could be interpreted that she did not support the branding effort. Ms. Ratti said one criticism she had of the DDI plan is that if feels like the research behind the concept is a bit flimsy and she is concerned about drilling down to the target markets and how the brand concept can be delivered to those target markets. She said she would like to make sure the target markets and demographics still make sense before we commit to a visual or verbal representation of the brand theme. She said she is also concerned about how we are going to pay for this. While using “Tourmark” funding to support the branding effort is appropriate, will this funding be sufficient to enact all 25 recommendations of the BLT. She said she would like to see some cost estimates for the 25 recommendations, with a comparison to the anticipated revenue stream for the next five years. This will help us understand the feasibility of doing this brand effort and where the funding gaps are likely to be. Ms. Ratti asked the BLT if all 25 recommendations needed to be carried out in order for this branding effort to be successful, or are there maybe 10 recommendations we need for success and others that are not so essential for success. She said she would like to see some priorities for the recommendations. Council Member Ratti noted that there was a subcommittee working on streamlining the events process and she felt this was critical because it would allow us to do more with less. We need to ask ourselves, are we doing the best we can as a City to be an events friendly city. If our concept is to have 200 event days a year, we have to have the infrastructure to do that. She said she would like to see this clarified in the recommendations. Council Member Schmitt commented that there has been intense discussion regarding the fiscal feasibility of this branding effort and what we will get back in actual tax revenues versus what we have to expend on this branding effort. Mayor Martini noted that there were several requests to speak on this issue. The following spoke in support of the branding recommendations: Beth Clooney, Executive Director of Marketing for John Asquaga’s Nugget. Len Stevens, Director of the Sparks Chamber of Commerce.


Page 9 of 20

Dennis McGovern, General Manager for the Legends at Sparks Marina. Scott Whittemore, Vice President of Wingfield Nevada Group, resident of Sparks, and member of the BLT. Michael Thomas, Reno-Sparks Convention and Visitors Authority (RSCVA). Kerri Garcia, owner of Garcia Public Relations and member of the BLT. Council Member Schmitt and Mayor Martini both expressed their support for the branding effort. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to accept the brand direction, along with recommendations from the Brand Leadership Team (BLT) to move on to become bigger and better. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.2 Presentation, discussion and possible direction regarding the formation of a new Joint Powers Authority for the Truckee River Flood Project (Time: 3:24:32 p.m.)

Truckee River Flood Project Director Naomi Duerr stated the Flood Project Coordinating Committee has a goal to revise the cooperative agreement and establish a new flood management authority. She then gave a power point presentation as outlined below: %�� $��&��'�( �� )�� %$��!��

1 �� 2� �� 2��

��$ ��D% �%&&' �*� � ��

�

%'��*�$ �

• + �� /��

• <��$�� #�� /��,3*/-�

• <�� +/��*��A �� C�� A ��

'�� +��!��

• ?�� '��

• 2��$�� 3*/�

• 2��

• 2��

• + � �� 3*/��

• /�� C� ��

, ��!�( �� -�� $�� #��./�

• 2 �� $��!�� A ��

• �� 4 �=�

• �� 9%$��!�� )�� 0��

• �� #�� *��A ��

• �� 1�� 2 �� 0��$ � ��

• �� #��!�#�� $��

#�� 3�� )��#��4 �

• /��I�3*/�� ,� � ��(��

��- �� $��

• (��I�/�� 3*/��


Page 10 of 20

• ��I�<�� A �� C��

�� C�� 7 �� C��

o � �� DD�J�A�$��

• #�� .�3*/�� $ �� ,�� / �+��

� +� �-�

• "�� .��

• ) �� B� �� .�� 3*/ �� $�� $�� .�

�� "2K��

• *�$��I�� 4�� $��

$ � �� $��$��

• �� .�/�� (��(�� L�MN�� MJ&�� $��

��

*�� + ��

• *� ��

• ��

• �� !��

• 2�� /��

• 3��

• /��2�� /�� $��*�� 1 5�/��

• ��4 G�� +�� #�� /��

• <��# ��

0 ��C� �� /��

• *�� /��

• � � $ �� 3*/�

• /�� 3*/�

• �� *��A ��

• /��

• )��$��+��

• #��

• *��+ ��*��

'�� !�� $��

3��I� �� #�� 3*/�� 7 �� + �� *��

/��D& �%&&'� ��

#��%&&'� *� �� 7 �� K�+ ��

�� !��

3��%&D&� 1 � �2�� /��

3��%&D&�� 3��

� �� %&D&8� #�� 3*/�

%&D&� �� *�$�� $��

�

"� �� $ � ��3*/��# �=�

• *�� <��

• #��*��A �� B� �� DF &&&��D' &&&�� A�$��

�

Council Member Schmitt noted that Sparks stepped out very early to initiate fees and flood projects and when it comes to allocating funds, everyone has to be treated equally. He expressed concern that if a new authority is created, the citizens of Sparks would be “double taxed”


Page 11 of 20

because they have already been paying for flood projects through sewer fees. He also expressed concern that the money is being spent on “recreation” projects and not flood projects. Council Member Smith stated that speaking as a member of the Flood Committee, their goal is to provide flood protection for the City of Sparks and for the whole region. The recreation portion of the funding went from $5 million to $46 million and he said it is his intention to ensure that the recreation projects are only funded after the flood protection projects are in place. He also noted that the entire flood project is expected to cost $1,600,000,000 and this community cannot afford this. Therefore, the Committee put a cap on what we are willing to spend, which is $525 million. He said when we find out the final cost of the project, we may be building this project on our own, without the Corps of Engineers. Mr. Smith stated regardless of how it comes about, flood control is the number one priority, not recreation. Council Member Smith asked for an update on the City’s flood control project, the realignment of the North Truckee Drain. Utility Manager JoAnn Meacham stated we have received the 30% design submittal about a week ago and staff is now going through the review process and providing comments back to the consultant. We are under budget and in negotiation with our consultant the regarding the schedule for delivery of the final documents. We are on target for a bid opening in the fall of 2010. She said time is of the essence because costs have decreased due to the lack of available work for contractors. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to accept the flood project report, as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.3 Consideration and possible acceptance of donation from the State of Nevada,

Office of Traffic Safety P.B.T. Grant in the amount of $10,500.00 (Time: 4:00:3272 p.m.)

Acting Police Chief Steve Keefer stated that the Police Department has the opportunity to accept a grant for the purchase of 30 portable breath test units. He noted that the following item is also acceptance of a grant for the purchase of 20 hand-held radar. He stated that neither grant requires matching funds. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to accept a donation from the State of Nevada, Office of Traffic Safety P.B.T. Grant in the amount of $10,500.00. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.4 Consideration and possible acceptance of donation from the State of Nevada,

Office of Traffic Safety Radar Grant in the amount of $10,500.00 (Time: 2:29:32 p.m.)

Discussion for this item was held under Item 6.3 A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to accept a donation from the State of Nevada, Office of Traffic Safety Radar Grant in the amount of


Page 12 of 20

$10,500.00. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.5 Consideration and possible approval of appointing alternate members to the

Tourism & Marketing Committee (Time: 4:02:18 p.m.) City Manager Carey noted that the Tourism & Marketing Committee has three members; however, in order for the committee to meet its objectives, they have requested that an additional Council Member be appointed as an official alternate to the Committee. They have also requested to reach out to the Nevada Resort Association so that the one member of the committee that serves in this category would have an alternate as well. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the appointment of Julia Ratti as the elected official alternate to the Tourism & Marketing Committee and request that the Nevada Resort Association provide a list of members who represent properties in the City of Sparks. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.6 Consideration and possible approval of an agreement to cooperate in the sale

of Parcel A of Parcel Map 2773 being approximately 1.2 acres of City owned property (Time: 4:04:15 p.m.)

Property Agent David Vill stated the City was approached by the Hurt family, who owns property adjacent to a city owned parcel. Their parcel does not have access to Disc Drive, but the City-owned parcel does have access to Disc Drive. Therefore, the Hurt family is proposing that we combine our properties in a listing agreement and put the properties up for sale for commercial purposes. Mr. Vill pointed out that under NRS 268 the City is allowed to enter into an economic development agreement to sell property; to establish a new commercial enterprise; to create opportunities for employment and residents of the City of Sparks. He stated the City is only going to be responsible for the cost of a preliminary title report, plus our share of the closing costs, should the properties sell. The Hurt family and/or the proposed buyer would be responsible for all the costs of rezoning, planning, survey, and commissions. The agreement is for 180 days, with an option to extend (with written approval). Should the property sell, the City would receive a pro-rata share of the gross proceeds, based on the square footage of our parcel. Mayor Martini asked how this property ended up with no access. Mr. Vill stated the Hurt family has access through a personal easement, but the easement does not pass on to the new owner. There is also access to the property via a residential street to the north. Council Member Ratti asked how the City came to own this property and whether we had plans for it. Mr. Vill stated we acquired the property in conjunction with Fire Station No. 4. The property was split into two parcels: the parcel the fire station was built on and this 1.2 acre parcel. The property has not been deemed surplus, but it is not needed for the fire station and we were simply approached by the Hurt family and felt it was a reasonable request. Ms. Ratti asked if Mr. Vill had spoken to the Parks Department or the Fire Department regarding whether they could use the property. Mr. Vill responded that he spoke to the Fire Chief and they don’t need the property and they have no plans for it. He said staff saw the request as an opportunity to dispose of excess property.


Page 13 of 20

Council Member Schmitt asked if this would be commercial property. Mr. Vill replied that it would be marketed as commercial property, but the current zoning is Agriculture on the Hurt parcel and Public Facility on the City parcel. The Master Plan designation for the property is commercial. Council Member Schmitt asked if the City had the right to refuse the offer if we did not feel the price was adequate. He also asked if we had the right of first refusal if the City decided to purchase the Hurt property. Mr. Vill stated that we could refuse to sign if we did not like the price, but there was no discussion regarding first right of refusal or the City purchasing the Hurt property. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve entering into and Agreement to Cooperate in the sale of City owned property, with an amendment to include a first right of refusal for the City of Sparks on the asking price. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.7 Consideration and possible approval of a Lease Agreement and

Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Sparks and the Sparks Heritage Foundation and Museum, Inc., for the buildings located at 814 and 820 Victorian Avenue, Sparks, NV (Time: 2:24:40 p.m.) (This item was heard out of order.)

Assistant City Manager Randy Mellinger noted that in 1981, the City of Sparks obtained control of the building with the intent of operating a museum. In 1986 the Sparks Heritage Foundation was formed to operate the museum for the City. Since then there have been a series of leases allowing the museum to operate in the building. The last lease expired several years ago and since then staff has been working with the Museum Board to create a long-term lease to enable the City to maintain a museum for the long-term. Staff has negotiated a lease and a Memorandum of Understanding with the Museum Board so that we can maintain this asset for our downtown area for the long term. Dr. Richard Simmonds, a museum volunteer, spoke in support of the MOU and lease agreement. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the Memorandum of Understanding and lease agreement between the City of Sparks and the Sparks Heritage Foundation and Museum as presented. Council Members Ratti, Smith, YES. Council Member Schmitt, NO. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion failed. It was noted that because there was a quorum of only three Council Members present, approval of this item needed to be unanimous. Therefore this item is not considered approved and it is now as if no action was taken. This item can be brought back to the Council, without prejudice. Council Member Schmitt noted that the City Attorney had sent out an opinion last week regarding a similar vote on another item and in that opinion he stated the item actually died and an item that dies cannot be brought back to the Council in the same form. He asked if this was correct. Attorney Adam stated this action was different from the item at the previous meeting in


Page 14 of 20

that the motion on the previous item failed with a three to two vote. If a motion failed, it can be brought back at the same meeting by a member of the prevailing side, but that is not the case with item—there is no prevailing side. It would have to be brought back at a different meeting.

6.8 Consideration and possible adoption of Resolution No. 3164, authorizing the

Resolution in support of Accelerating Congestion Relief Improvements at the Pyramid Highway/McCarran Boulevard Intersection (Time: 3:25:32 p.m. This item was heard out of order.)

RTC Deputy Executive Director Derek Morse stated that the Pyramid/McCarran has long been recognized as one of the most congested intersections we have and we have a very high accident rate for this intersection. The projections for the future show that the problems will just get worse. The RTC, the City of Sparks, NDOT, and our federal partners have been working for the past several years, using a federal process, to develop a project to address those problems. If we stay with the federal process, we anticipate having a project constructed by 2018. Because of the long-term nature of the federal process, a three point plan was developed to accelerate the improvements as follows: 1) remove the federal money from the project; 2) fund the short-term project using local fuel tax funding; 3) do the project using RTC procedures for design, construction, and right-of-way acquisition. This will advance the timing of the project by about four years and save $28 to 29 million in costs. We will also be able to move forward with the right-of-way acquisition. Mr. Morse stated that in order to accomplish the acceleration of this project, RTC needs an expression of the City’s endorsement of that acceleration as expressed in Resolution No. 3164. He stated that if the resolution is passed by the City, it will be taken to the RTC Board for endorsement. Mayor Martini noted that there was a request to address the Council regarding the item as follows: Mr. Fred Barrie, 3396 Lago Marsino Court, spoke in opposition to the improvements, stating that whatever improvements are made will be a detriment to the Village Green subdivision and make access and egress to their homes more difficult. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Resolution No. 3164, in support of Accelerating Congestion Relief Improvements at the Pyramid Highway/McCarran Boulevard Intersection. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: 7.1 Second Reading, Public Hearing and possible approval of Bill No. 2611,

amending the Sparks Municipal Code relating to the exercise of first amendment rights on public property; declaring that the City has a substantial governmental interest in regulating certain matters on public property; clarifying certain provisions; and providing other matters properly related thereto

(TO BE CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 26, 2009) (Time: 4:15:08 p.m.)


Page 15 of 20

City Manager Carey requested that this item be continued to the October 26, 2009, due to an error in publishing the first reading. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak on the proposed code amendment. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to continue the Public Hearing and Second Reading of Bill No. 2611 to the meeting of October 26, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items:

8.1 PCN009023, Consideration and possible approval on a request from Greg St.

Partners, LLC., for a Tentative Commercial/Industrial Subdivision Map to divide an existing multi-tenant building (approximately 93,654 sq. ft in size) into a 36 unit subdivision on a site approximately 4.0 acres in size located at 10 Greg Street (Time: 4:16:18 p.m.)

Associate Planner Chere’ Jigour stated this is a request to divide an existing structure into a 36 unit commercial/industrial condominium parcel. She stated the tentative map findings have been previously satisfied, except for conditions five and six. These conditions require flood-proofing of the building and meeting current landscaping requirements. These conditions are required as tentative maps are new entitlements and as such we require them to be in conformance with current codes. Planning Commission and staff are recommending approval of this request with the conditions as outlined in the staff report. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak on the tentative subdivision map request. Michael Pagni, representing Greg Street Partners, stated that because this is an existing building, they are respectively requesting that the two conditions relating to flood-proofing and landscaping be eliminated. He said they feel these two conditions were designed for new construction and this is an existing building. He said the property owner is simply requesting the tentative map in order to broaden his leasing and ownership options for existing commercial uses. Mr. Pagni then reviewed, in detail, the reasons they felt these two conditions were not appropriate for this request. In response to questions from Council, Mr. Pagni noted he was retained by Greg Street Partners after the Planning Commission Meeting, so this argument was not presented to the Planning Commission. Mayor Martini asked if the City would be liable if we did not enforce the condition and flood damage occurred to the building at some point in the future. Mr. Krutz stated that the likelihood of being sued would go up because we had an opportunity to impose flood improvements and the Council chose not to. Mayor Martini asked if there was a way to indemnify the City. Mr. Pagni


Page 16 of 20

offered the opinion that there is no requirement right now that they comply with flood improvements and that therefore the City’s liability would remain the same as they are today. Council Member Smith asked the City Attorney for his opinion. City Attorney Adams stated he agreed with Mr. Pagni’s arguments. He said this is not the type of vehicle the City has used in the past to enforce our building codes. He said typically when someone applies for a building permit to change a building, they are then required to bring the building up to code; however, this is a different situation. Mr. Adams further explained that if one of the units were sold and the new owner wanted to make changes and applied for a building permit, at that point the owner of the unit would then be required to upgrade their portion of the building to meet the flood requirements. That being said, Mr. Adams stated that this is not the type of situation that our ordinances were intended to address and it would be onerous on the application to place those particular conditions on this applicant. Council Member Ratti asked staff to address the statement that this [type of condominium conversion] has never come up before. Community Development Director Neil Krutz stated a situation like this does not come up every day, however, every development project is unique and we have certainly faced situations before where an entitlement was changing and staff felt it was appropriate to follow each step in the code—in this case the flood and landscaping issues. There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed. Council Member Ratti asked if the Planning Commission was told the same thing by legal counsel as what the City Attorney told them regarding liability. Mr. Adams stated that Assistant City Attorney Doug Thornley was the legal representative at the Planning Commission meeting and the opinion he gave them was not the same, because the arguments from Mr. Pagni were not presented at the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Adams stated Mr. Thornley said that this was basically a conversion, but subsequent to the Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Thornley has received the letter from Mr. Pagni expressing the applicant’s arguments. Council asked if they could remand this back to the Planning Commission so that they could consider Mr. Pagni’s arguments. Mr. Krutz asked for a recess so staff could check the mandated time line for processing this tentative map. Council also asked if it was remanded back and the time frame runs out, is the application automatically denied. Mr. Krutz stated it would be considered approved as submitted, with no conditions. Council Member Smith said his inclination is to approve the tentative map with the exceptions they are asking for, but he warned the applicant that they needed to make full disclosure to the tenants/owners that they make any changes, when they apply for a building permit, they will have to comply with these two requirements. Attorney Adams noted that this would be up to the applicant and that we could not require the applicant to make this disclosure. Council Member Ratti asked if the opinion of the City Attorney had any effect on staff’s recommendation to include the two conditions. Mr. Krutz stated their recommendation was based on consulting with legal counsel prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Hearing


Page 17 of 20

today that the opinion of legal counsel has changed, staff would recommend that the tentative map be approved without two of the conditions. A brief recess was held regarding the mandatory time line for approval of this application. After the meeting was called back to order, Mr. Krutz stated that in light of our Attorney’s advice, staff is recommending that the City Council drop conditions five and six and approve the Tentative Map. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the Tentative Map PCN09023, with conditions 1 through 4 and 7, based on the Findings T1 through T14 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

8.2 Public Hearing, consideration and possible action on Resolution No. 3165-

PCN09022 - Master Plan Amendment request from Digestive Health Investors North to change the land use designation from EDR (Estate Density Residential) to OP (Office Professional) on a site approximately 3.18 acres in size located at 1525 & 1565 Los Altos Parkway (Time: 4:13:17 p.m.)

Associate Planner Chere’ Jigour noted the property is located at the southeast corner of Vista Boulevard and Los Altos Parkway. She stated the Office Professional land use is appropriate for this site as it would allow uses that are less intensive than the already existing zoning district of Commercial and more in conformance with the current and anticipated uses of the property. She stated staff and the Planning Commission are recommending approval of this Master Plan Amendment. The applicant’s representative stated this application was simply fixing an old error and bringing the Master Plan Land use designation into compliance with the zoning and the existing land uses. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding this Master Plan Amendment Request. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Resolution No. 3165, a Master Plan Amendment associated with PCN09022, based on findings MP1 through MP3 and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

8.3 Public Hearing, PCN09020, review and possible action for Tentative

Approval of an amendment to the Kiley Ranch South Planned Development Handbook – Los Altos Crossing to alter the sign criteria and to allow certain uses on a site approximately 12.65 acres in size within the NUD (Kiley Ranch South Planned Development – Los Altos Crossing) zoning district generally located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Sparks Boulevard and Los Altos Parkway and south of Village Knoll Drive, Sparks, NV (Time: 4:45:32 p.m.)


Page 18 of 20

Senior Planner Tim Thompson stated this amendment affects the Los Altos Crossing portion of the Kiley Ranch planned development—specifically the northeast corner of Sparks Boulevard and Los Altos Parkway. The applicant and the City have discussed proposed sign changes for that development. The sign standards for this development are less than other commercial developments in close proximity. This amendment would bring the signs standards for this development into conformance with the City’s C2 or General Commercial sign standards which would give them more signage than they are currently allowed, per the handbook. These proposed standards are appropriate for a center of this type. Mr. Thompson stated the applicant is also asking to include some additional uses into the planned development: jewelry exchanges; smog check center; quick lube and oil change establishments; and veterinary clinics. He emphasized that the jewelry exchange is not a pawn shop, but more of a retail use and design standards are in place to ensure that these types of uses are kept under control. Mr. Thompson said staff has made all the applicable findings and they are recommending approval. Council Member Schmitt said when this center was first built, signage was a big issue. Mr. Thompson agreed, stating that the concern was signs that would face the adjacent residential to the east. This is not changing—there is still a standard in the handbook that prohibits the signage from facing the residential areas. He noted that when he talked to neighborhood residents, their main concern was that they would not have bright flashing signs facing their property. Mr. Thompson said that this change actually will only allow the shopping center to have six additional monument signs. The shopping center will still have to follow the codes for the existing center identification signs and signs on the buildings. Council Member Schmitt asked if the additional uses were driving by applications for these uses or just to open up future potential. Mr. Thompson stated his understanding was that these were potential uses for the future and that there has been some interest for these types of uses. Mr. Thompson noted that this item was noticed to the property owners within 750 feet of the shopping center and that he did receive several calls. Mr. Schmitt said that he did not have a problem with the changes; however, he would like to see a mechanism in place to so that in the future we don’t have to re-visit signage in the handbooks. Community Director Neil Krutz stated this is not so much an opportunity to go back and correct things that were missed or close loopholes, but an opportunity to work with the developer and take advantage of what we have learned over time about the requirements for commercial centers. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding this handbook amendment request. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to grant tentative approval of an amendment to the Kiley Ranch South Planned Development Handbook associated with PCN09020, adopting findings PD1 through PD21 and the facts supporting those


Page 19 of 20

findings as set forth in the staff report. The tentative approval includes that the applicant shall file for final approval of the planned development within one year from the date of the City Council granting tentative approval of the planned development handbook. Due to the nature of the tentative planned development, the Planning Commission does not recommend that the City Council require a bond at this time as stated in NRS 278A.490. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried.

8.4 Public Hearing, PCN06077, review and possible action on a request from

Synergy Golf Holdings for Tentative Approval of an amendment to a planned development handbook (D’Andrea) to allow for the creation of an additional 72-unit village utilizing previously approved units on a site approximately 157 acres in size in the PD (Planned Development) – D’Andrea) zoning district generally located east of the intersection of Vista Boulevard & North D’Andrea Parkway, Sparks, NV (Time: 4:57:33 p.m.)

Senior Planner Tim Thompson this amendment would allow for an additional 72-unit single-family residential subdivision located beyond Antella Court where the existing golf club maintenance facility is located. He then reviewed the history of the handbook and noted that the applicant is using 72 of the remaining 75 units available for development under the original handbook. Mr. Thompson noted that this area has been difficult to maintain and keep people out of the area. Several years ago it provided access to the golf course and all-terrain vehicles were tearing up the golf course. There is a small parcel adjacent to N. D’Andrea Parkway which was originally slated for a fire station. There will not be a fire station built in this area, so the parcel is available for construction of residential units. Part of the golf course will be re-configured to allow for the construction of these units. Mr. Thompson noted that the amendment is specific to the creation of this village and the applicant is updating the maps. The proposal is to use the existing Veranda standards in the handbook for single-family residential units. He noted that the applicant will be bringing a tentative map to the Council for approval in the next six or so weeks. He stated staff has been able to make all the appropriate findings and are recommending approval. Chris Baker, Nevada Land Use, representing the applicant, stated this area has been a problem for both the City’s Code Enforcement Division as well as the Golf Club and it is currently relatively unsightly. The additional village will maximize the infrastructure that is currently in place and solve the problems of the past. The maintenance facility will be relocated to a new facility on the eastern portion of the existing club house parking lot. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding this handbook amendment Request. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to grant tentative approval of an amendment to a Planned Development Handbook associated with PCN06077, adopting findings PD1 through PD21 and the facts supporting those findings as set forth in the staff report. The tentative approval includes that the applicant shall file for final


Page 20 of 20

approval of the planned development within one year from the date of the City Council granting tentative approval of the planned development handbook. Due to the nature of the tentative planned development, the Planning Commission does not recommend that the City Council require a bond at this time as stated in NRS 278A.490. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Salerno, Carrigan, ABSENT. Motion carried. 9. Comments:

9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 5:05:12 p.m.) Council Member Smith requested that the annexation of three acres east of town be removed from the table and heard at the October 26th meeting. He also congratulated “Grandpa Schmitt” upon the arrival of his granddaughter, Elizabeth, just a couple of hours ago. City Manager Carey announced vacancies on the Sparks Citizens Advisory Committee and encouraged all citizens to consider serving on this important committee. 10. *Adjournment (Time: 5:06:54 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:06 p.m. ______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________

City Clerk >>>

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 2:00 P.M. Monday, October 26, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 2:02:10 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 2:01 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 2:02:18 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 2:02:53 p.m.) The invocation was given by Pastor Paul Sheehan from the Queen Way Church of Christ. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 2:04:02 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Ron Smith. *Comments from the Public (Time: 2:04:33 p.m.) Ms. Antoinette Hoffman thanked all veterans present for their service. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 2:06:01 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. Item 6.12 was moved to the first item to be heard under General Business. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the agenda as amended. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: None. (Time: 2:06:39 p.m.) 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest: 4.1 Proclamation – Nevada’s Lights on Afterschool Day (Time: 2:06:41 p.m.) Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming October 22, 2009, as Nevada’s Light on Afterschool Day in recognition of the importance of afterschool programs in the lives of children, families and communities. The proclamation was accepted by Sparks Recreation Supervisor Shauna Nelson.

4.2 Presentation – Fire Department Extrication Equipment & Grant (Time:

2:10:28 p.m.) Fire Chief Andy Flock stated that this was a presentation on the progress of the State of Nevada, Department of Public Safety Extrication Equipment Grant that was approved by the City Council. Captain Ginny Sievert noted that the Fire Department responds to an average of 2,153

Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of October 26, 2009

Page 2 of 23

crashes a year, with about 739 injuries per year. The Fire Department needs to keep up with technology in order to be able to extricate people from newer vehicles. She gave a presentation as outlined below: �

��

� ��

��!!�

• " ��#��

• ��$% ��&'()*+*(,�% -�� .�

• ��/��0�� !!��

• �� !��

o 1�� 2��!�� !3�

o 4��#�!��

o ��-5 �� !�

• $��!�� !��

"� ��6 �� !�

• ��

• 7 �� +��

• 0% ��!��

• ��!!�� % �� !�� !�� !8 8 �

Council Member Smith asked the age of the equipment the Department currently uses. Ms. Sievert stated most of the equipment is about 30 years old, with some equipment being only 15 years old. In response to additional questions, Ms. Sievert stated that all of the engines have some type of extrication equipment on them. $50,000 per year will allow them to purchase one full compliment of extrication equipment and a partial compliment of equipment. She noted that the new equipment will go on engines that handle the downtown area, the Pyramid Corridor and the I-80 corridor because those areas experience the worst traffic accidents.

4.3 Informational Presentation on the Sparks Comprehensive Plan (formerly

Master Plan) discussing Chapter 3 – A Balanced Land Use Pattern (Time: 2:17:58 p.m.)

Community Development Director Neil Krutz introduced Senior Planner Karen Melby and noted that the Council approved funding to do the comprehensive plan using outside consultants. However, with the budget cuts that had to be made, staff decided to release the consultant from the contract and do the work in-house. Ms. Melby has led that effort and is here today to provide an update on the land use portion of the plan. Ms. Melby stated the Sparks Master Plan is now being called the Sparks Comprehensive Plan and this presentation is specifically regarding Chapter three of the plan. She then gave a presentation as outlined below: �� #�� !� �&��% �� !�� !�� !�� !�� .�

• ��!�� 7 �!��

o #�� !�� !�&�9�9�:��!� �+�� ;!�+�0� !�� +��<!+��9.�

o ��!-6 �/��!-��!�% ��

o �� !��% �� !�

o :��!�� !-��!��


Page 3 of 23

o ��,=�� !��!��

• #�� !��

o ,�� % �<!�� >� �� !�

o " ��!�� !�� ,�� % �<!�

o 7 �<�!�� !��<� ��!!��!�� <!�

o #�� !� �� !� � � � �� !�� % �� !-��

� �� !�

o (?�� !��!�

0��,��1�� % �<!��

• $�@�� ;!��

• $��#��

• $�#� ��#��

• $��!�� #��

• #� ��

��<!�#�� !�� 0��#� �� !��

• #��(�2�� 6 ��% ��

• #��A�2��!�� 1�� % �<��

• #��?�2�$�@�� ;!��

• #��)�2�$��#��

• #��,�2�$�#� ��#��

• #��B�2�$��!�� #��

• #��C�2�#� ��

• $� ��!��

�� #��!�� !�� % �� !��

�!�!+�� +�� !��!� ��!9�"�� !!�!��

��

• �� ;!��

• �� !�� ;!��#��!�

• :��!� ��

• " ��

• 0� !��6 �� &06 �.�

• ��

• �� 6 �� !�

• $�� !�

$�@�� ;!��

• " ��!�� !��!!��!�� !� �+�� !�� +�06 �+�� !+��!+��<!+��9�

• #��!��!!��!�� ;!��!��!�� +�/��!�� !�� 9�

• 4�� #��!�� ,=��(?�

• �� ;!��#��!��

• ��6 �� ; !��#�� % �� !��!�

• �� ;!��7 ��!��#� ��!�� 6 �� ;!��#��!�� % �#��!�

• #�� !�� !�&@�!� �!!��<�2�� #� ��1��!�2�

#�� 1��!.�

��!�� !��

• ,��!�� !��

• A� ��!�� :��!� ��

• (� �� 5 �!�� $��

• )� ��!�� 0� !��6 �� &06 �.�

��;(��7 �� !�� ;!��7 ��% �� !�4�!�� +�#�� +�" ��!��+��

� ��4�� $��!�#��% ��


Page 4 of 23

• �� ;(9(�� 0�� #�� !�� !�� ; !�� #�� !�� !� �!� ��

�� % �<��!�� !�� % ��9�

• ��;(9A�� 0��#��!�� ; !�� !�� !�!�

�� #��% �� " ��!��!��"�D=�� <!9��0��

� �� !�!� !�� !�� !�� !�!� % �� !��

�!� !��9��

��;A�� ;!�� 4�!��!�

• ��;A9(�� 5 �� !�� ;!�� +�� !�� !�!��

� � �� >�� % �� !�� !��!��!��9�

• �� ;A9A�� 0�� #�� !�� !�� % �� !�� !� � � ��

��!�� !�� !��9��

• ��;A9A�� 0��#��!�� % �� !�� !��#��E!��% ��!�� !�!��

% ��#��E!��!��!9�

• ��;A9)��0��#��!��+�% �� % � �� !�� !+�� !�!�� !�� !��

��9��

��;A�� " �� 4��

• �� ;?9(�� 0�� #�� !�� <��

�� !�� !+�!�� >� � ��!+��!�� -�� !��!+��

�� !9�

• �� ;?9A�� 0�� #�� !�� !�� !!�!!� ��

�� !�� !�� !9��

• ��;?9A��0��#��% �� % �� !�� !� !��

��!�� !� � � �� !��+� �� +� !�>�+� �� !�� !+� �� !��+�

!��!��+��!!�� !�� !��!��!�� 9��

��;)��1�!�� !�� ;!��@�!��

• ��;)9(��0��#��% ��!�� !�� !�!9��

• �� ;)9A�� 0�� #�� !�� !�!�� !�� !� ��

�� !�9�

• �� ;)9A�� 0�� #�� !�� <�� !� � ��

�� !9��

�� ;,�� 1�!�� ;!�� 5 �� " ��!� �� ;!�!� �� $��!!�� 7 �� 7 ��!� ��

0� !��

• ��;,9(��0��#��% ��!�� /��!�� !� �� !�% �� #��

�!�� /��!� �� % �� #��9�

• ��;,9A��0��#��!�� !�� /��!��!��

�� !9�

• ��;,9A��0�� ;!�� !�� !�!��

�� !�� !��&�7 0.9��

�� ;!��#��!��

• ��4�!�� &��4.�

• ��% �� !��4�!�� &��4.��

• 7 �� !��4�!�� &7 �4.��

• :�� !��4�!�� &:�4.��

• 7 ��; !��&7 ;.��

• #�� &#.��

• 0��!��#�� &0#.��

• �� #� ��&�#.��

• " ��!��&".��

• 6 � ��&6 �.��

• #�� 1��!�&#1.��

• 4��4�!��&44.��


Page 5 of 23

• 0� !��6 �� &06 �.��

#��>� �#�� !�� #��?��

• ��<�� !��!�� <� ��!��

• @��!�� !��!!�� !��!!��!�� <!�

• #� �� !��1��$��4��&1$4.�� !��!� Council Member Schmitt expressed concern that the goals and policies of the plan would conflict with the expectations of some citizens and people might think the plan is fine until it comes to building high density residential next door. He stressed that the plan cannot be subjective. Council Member Carrigan expressed concern that the new plan would have a negative impact on planned development handbooks. Mr. Krutz emphasized that the comprehensive plan would not change any existing entitlements in any existing handbooks.

• 4��0�� 6 � �� 0��<��4��2�% � ��!��!�6 � �� 4��4�!�� • @� �� !�� !�!�� % �� -��

• �� !��!�� !�� ;!��

• ��!�� !�� F� � ��!�� ;!�!�

0� ��0��

• � �� !�2�5 �<!��!�� #��B�2�$��!�� #��

• "�� # �2�5 �<!��!�� #��)�2�$��#��

• $�� # �2�5 �<!��!�� #��,�2�$�#� ��#�� #��C�2�#� ��

• % ��# �2�� #�� !!�� #�� !��

• &��'# �2�#��#�� #�� !��

• % ��# �2�4�� #� �� 4��% ��

Council Member Schmitt thanked Ms. Melby for all her work on the plan and cautioned staff that this is a new economic climate and if we are going to have a useable document, it has to be a new way of doing business to make it successful. Mr. Krutz noted that staff would provide updates on the Sparks Comprehensive Plan in February 2010 and in March 2010. Council Member Ratti asked where the goal of preservation of older neighborhoods was reflected in this plan. Ms. Melby said those goals and standards would be included in the “livable city” chapter of the document. This chapter will include housing, environmental elements, and park standards, which are all quality of life issues. 4.4 Presentation regarding economic development incentives by the Nevada

Commission on Economic Development and Economic Development of Western Nevada (Time: 2:45:22 p.m.)

Community Development Director Neil Krutz introduced Linsey Anderson from Nevada Commission on Economic Development and Chuck Alvey from EDAWN. He noted that they would be providing a presentation on what types of incentives Nevada is offering businesses to get them to move to our area. The presentation is outlined as follows: � �� (�� )��

��"� ��

• #�� !�� 0�� !�

��


Page 6 of 23

• 4�� !!�!�� !�� !��&�� .�

• ��!�� !�� !��!�&� �� !.�

• ��!-7 �<�� !!�!�� +� �� #��

@��; ��

• �� !�� &� �% �� !��!.�

" �� !�

• " �� !�G�� !�G��!�� !��

0��#� �� !�

• 6 ��% �

• �#�� 7 �!!��

5 ��!�� H�

• ��

• " �� !�

• I �� !�

• ��

• $�� -��!!�

#��!� �� I ��!�� !�

7 �!!��

• ��

�� !�� "�� #��

�� $ � ��

�� $ ��%�

��

• $!!�� G�!��!�

o ��!�� !��!��!�

o 4��

� �� !�� !��

o " �� !�� J��K�� +�� !� �!!��

� ��

o 6 ��!�� % �<��+�� +�� +��!��+��!+��9�

I �� !�

• �� &/��!.�

o $��!��,=L �� !��!��!�� !��!��!��

• 7 �!��!� �!!�� !��!��

• 7 �!�� % ��!�� !� �!!�� !� �� !�

• �� !�� % �� !�

" �� !�

• ��!�M �; !��0��

• $��AL ��!��!�M ��!�� &�4�� .��

o AL ��!��!��

• 0�� !�� !��

• �� % �� <!��!�� '(+===+===�� % ��

��*�+�� (,�� *�

��*� -.-/01 � #2 2 � 3--2/0 �

��4�� /1 � #2 2 � 3/ 2 ��

&�� 0.-/01 � #2 2 � 30-2/0 ��


Page 7 of 23

�

• 0��AL ��!��!�� E��

• �!!� ��!�!�� !��

• ��

o '(+===+===�� !��

o AL ��% ��'A=+===�

o �� % ��A=+===-B=�� !�� !��'???9??�

��!� ��0��$�� !�

• ��,=L �� !� ��(=��!�

• 0��#�� !!�� !��!�� !�

• $�� !��

7 ��@�!� �!!�0��$��

• �� !!�% ��!��!!�� !�� !�!�

• 4��!�9=,L �� !��'A,=+===��% ��!+�� (9(CL �� % ��!��'A,=+===��

• $�� !�,=L ��!�� % �/��!�

0�� !�� % �

• ��!�� !�� !�� % �� !�

• 1�� +�� /��!�

• �� !�� !��7 � �� $!!�!�� !��&7 $�.��07 ##�

• 7 $�-07 ##�% �<!�% �� !��!�� % �<�

• #�� !��!��A,L �� !�!�

• �� !�� !�� !��% ��049��0��% �<��

�� !�� !�� !<��!��!��9��#�!�� <��!�

�� 9�

��4�� !�

• ��% �� !�2�;��

o #�� !��N(==+===��#��!��N�B=+===��5 �!��M �#��<��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

� ��

!��

"�#��

'(+===+===� '(==+===� ',=+===+===�2�

� ��!��

',+===+===��

'(+===+===� �-$�

� �� $�� C,� (=� C,� C,� (=�

�#��%��&��

�#��%�� %��

'(*9D?� '(,9DB�&D=L ��

!��-��

��% ��

'(*9D?� '(*9D?�'(,9DB&D=L ��

!��-��

��% ��

� � �� 0% ��

��

7 �!��!��!��

��!��

5 ��

� ��!��

��

0% �� 0% ��% ��

�

�

�� !��

�

��


Page 8 of 23

��

��

��

� ��

!��

"�#��

A=L �� !��

��

'(==+===� A=L �� !��

��

A=L �� !��

��

�-$�

� ��

$��

(=L ��B+�

% ��!�

��

(=� (=L ��B+�% ��

�!��

(=L ��B+�

% ��!�

��

(=�

�#��%��

&��

�#��%��

� �%��

'(*9D?� '(,9DB�&D=L ��

!��-��

% ��

'(*9D?� '(*9D?�'(,9DB&D=L ��

!��-��

��% ��

� � �� 0% �� 7 �!��!��!��

��!��

5 ��

� ��!��

��

0% �� 0% ��% ��

�

$��!!�

• $�� !�� #��

• #�� !�!��

• �#�� !� �!�� !�&�� !��% ��

�� !�� .��!��?=��!��

• $�� !�� #�� 9�

• "��+�� !��!�� !�� 0�� 9�

• #�� !�% �� 0��

o A��!�

o ,��!�

• 7 �!�� % ��!�� !��

• "�� +�� % ��!��+��!�� !��

�� !�

• �� !�� % �� <��9�

• �� !��

o 1� � ��2�� +�� !� �+�0"1!��!�!��!�

o �� 2��!��<�� +�� !��+��

� �� " �� !�

#� ��

• 5 �� % ��!��

o ��--% % % 9�� A ��9�� -� �� O�� 9��

• ��!�� !��

o �� !�� $ ��!� +� �� @�!� �!!� �� +� � �� #�� !!��

��

o CC,�BDC�)?A,�&��.P�CC,�C)A�D)((�&��.P�CC,�BDC�)),=�&��.P�� !� Q ��>�9!��9 �9�!��

5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:11:25 p.m.) Consent Items 5.2 and 5.9 were pulled for discussion and separate vote. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Consent Items 5.1, and 5.3 through 5.8. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Page 9 of 23


transfers are for the period September 24, 2009, through October 7, 2009 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.


for The Holder Group Vending company, LLC, dbat Navjot Discount Liquor & Smoke, located at 545 Nichols Blvd., Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. William Edward Rohan (Time: 3:12:14 p.m.)

An agenda item from Sparks Police Department recommending the City Council approve an application for a Gaming License for Navjot Discount Liquor. Mr. Rohan is the Manager of The Holder Group, which has a slot route vending license in Sparks. The license will provide a $480.00 annual fee for four multi-denominational, upright slot machines and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report. Council Member Salerno stated he would be abstaining from the vote on this item because the Holder Group is a client of his business. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Consent Item 5.2. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSTAIN. Motion carried.

5.3 Consideration and possible approval of an application for a Gaming license for Nevada Restaurant Services, Inc., dba Dotty’s #47, located at 2473 Wingfield Hills Rd., Ste. 120, Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Steve Guy Hixon

An agenda item from Sparks Police Department recommending the City Council approve an application for a Gaming License for Dotty’s #47. Mr. Hixon is the General Manager of Nevada Restaurant Services. The license will provide a $1,800.00 annual fee for fifteen multi-denominational, upright slot machines and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.

5.4 Consideration and possible approval of additional funds to Stantec

Consulting, Inc. to provide a Tax Increment Financing Area Engineer’s Report for the proposed Copper Canyon Development

An agenda item from Community Development Director Neil Krutz recommending the City Council approve additional funds to Stantec Consulting under their current contract for the preparation and completion of an engineer’s report for a proposed tax increment financing area for Copper Canyon Development.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of the purchase of five 2010 Ford

Crown Victoria Sedans and one Ford Escape Hybrid from Jones West Ford in the amount of $157,151

An agenda item from Maintenance Superintendent Ron Korman recommending the City Council approve the purchase of five 2010 Ford Crown Victoria sedans and one Ford Escape Hybrid vehicle through a State of Nevada joinder bid. These vehicles will replace vehicles currently in


Page 10 of 23

use by the Police Department which have reached their useful life cycle. Funds were budgeted for this purchase.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval of the purchase of one used 2007

Chevrolet Truck from the University of Nevada Reno in the amount of $28,295 for the Police Department K-9 Unit

An agenda item from Maintenance Superintendent Ron Korman recommending the City Council approve the purchase of a used K-9 unit vehicle for the Police Department. The Police Officers from the K-9 Unit and personnel from the Garage have inspected the truck and determined that it met their specifications. The vehicle comes equipped with a radio, radar unit, and MDT, and the total price of $31,195 9 (including painting and striping), which represents about $8,000.00 in savings over the purchase of a new vehicle. Funds have been budgeted for this purchase.

5.7 Consideration and possible approval of the purchase of one 2009

International Vac-Con truck from Municipal Maintenance Equipment in the amount of $358,574.50

An agenda item from Maintenance Superintendent Ron Korman recommending the City Council approve the purchase of a sewer/storm drain cleaning truck. This vehicle is used on a daily basis to maintain the City’s infrastructure and will replace a 1996 vehicle. The City currently owns five similar vacuum/sewer cleaning trucks which perform well. Purchasing a truck similar to the ones we already own reduces the need to stock parts and train personnel to maintain and repair a new type of vehicle. Funds were budgeted for this purchase.


(ICA) with the Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County (RTC) for the FY2010/11 RTC program of projects associated with the Regional Road Impact Fee (RRIF) Program, the Fuel Tax Street and Highway Program, and the Sales Tax Street and Highway Program

An agenda item from Deputy Public Works Director Pete Etchart recommending the City Council approve an interlocal agreement with RTC for preventative maintenance (pavement patching and slurry seal) street projects in Sparks. Funds are budgeted for the portions of these projects that are not eligible for RTC funding and individual agreements with RTC will be submitted to the Council for approval for specific roadway projects.


for Brandywine Bookmaking, LLC dba Lucky's dbat Nugget, located at 1100 Nugget Avenue, Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Joseph Max Asher (Time: 3:12:54 p.m.)

An agenda item from Sparks Police Department recommending the City Council approve an application for a Gaming License for Lucky’s at the Nugget. Mr. Rohan is the Manager of The Holder Group, which has a slot route vending license in Sparks. The license will provide a $1,200.00 annual fee for seven LVDC FLX Wagering Terminals, version 341.045 and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report. Council Member Salerno stated he would be abstaining from the vote on this item because the Sparks Nugget is a client of his business.


Page 11 of 23

Council Member Schmitt asked why the bookmaking license was being changed. Acting Police Chief Steve Keefer stated that the bookmaking license is separate from the Nugget’s gaming license and a new company is going to be doing the bookmaking on the Nugget’s premises. Mr. Schmitt asked if the new company had a history of doing business in Nevada. The response was that the company had quite a few locations in Nevada. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Consent Item 5.9. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSTAIN. Motion carried.


6.1 Consideration and possible approval of renewing the city’s membership with the Nevada League of Cities & Municipalities for fiscal year 2009-10 (Time: 4:26:02 p.m.)

City Manager Shaun Carey recommended that the City Council approve the City’s membership with the Nevada League of Cities in the amount of $17,889.80. He noted that this amount reflects a temporary decrease in dues of 20% from what the City paid last year in dues. Council Member Carrigan asked Mr. David Fraser from the Nevada League of Cities to tell the Council exactly what the League does for the City of Sparks. Mr. Fraser said that the League of Cities gives a unified voice to all Nevada cities and municipalities; provides legislative support and provides programs; training for elected officials; and other services. Council Member Carrigan expressed his disappointment in the legislative services provided by the League during the last legislative session. Mr. Fraser said one of the most difficult tasks the League has is representing cities that are not on the same page and sometimes they just have to represent the majority, which leaves some cities feeling that they are not being represented. Council Member Ratti said she is not supporting this membership because we are facing difficult times and most City staff have already given up their memberships in professional organizations and it is not a reflection on the League, she just felt that the money could be used more effectively somewhere else at this time. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve renewing the City’s membership with the Nevada League of Cities & Municipalities for fiscal year 2009-2010 in the amount of $17,889.80. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Ratti, NO. Council Member Schmitt, ABSTAIN. Motion carried.

6.2 Consideration and possible acceptance of a grant from the E.L. Cord

Foundation in the amount of $8,000 for the annual Kids Free Fishing Day Program conducted by the Sparks Rotary Club and the City of Sparks Parks and Recreation Department (Time: 4:37:57 p.m.)

Recreation Superintendent Tracy Domingues stated that this grant was to purchase a special net to be used by the Sparks Rotary Club for the Kids’ Free Fishing Day project to promote a positive fishing experience for the kids.


Page 12 of 23

A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to accept a grant from the E.L. Cord Foundation in the amount of $8,000 for the Sparks Parks and Recreation Department and the Sparks Rotary to continue their accommodation of youth in the annual Kids Free Fishing Day event. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.3 Consideration and possible acceptance of a donation from the Sparks Pop

Warner Football program consisting of 160 50# bags of fertilizer, to be used at the Golden Eagle Regional Park (Time: 4:39:54 p.m.)

Operations Superintendent Brian Bessette stated that one of the budget cuts in the Parks Department has been the suspension of the fertilization program for much of the grass areas throughout the City of Sparks. The only exception is the athletic facilities, due to safety concerns. The Pop Warner Football was transplanted from the old Don Mellow to the new Golden Eagle Park and they have been excellent stewards of the new ball park. Mr. Robert Bates, President of the Sparks Pop Warner Association, noted that this donation is in part, self-serving, because when the turf areas leading to the ball fields gets worn, dirt starts getting on the artificial turf and once it does, it can’t be removed. The Pop Warner board voted to donate the fertilizer and John Deere agreed to give Pop Warner a discount on the fertilizer. They hope to assist in making the grass healthier and give it more resistance to wear and tear. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to accept the donation of 160 bags of fertilizer, valued at 2,320.00, for use on the ornamental turf at the Golden Eagle Regional Park. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.4 Consideration and possible approval of a settlement in Laborers’

International Union of North America, Local 169, and Richard Daly, Petitioners Vs. City of Sparks, Case No. CV09-01895, Second Judicial District Court (Time: 4:43:23 p.m.)

City Attorney Adams stated that this settlement was discussed in an attorney/client session and the City prevailed in this case. He said the settlement is essentially to save the tax payers money and the City is looking at no expenditures—we are just looking to maintain the “status quo.” A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the settlement of all claims arising from the case of Laborers’ International Union of North America, Local 169, and Richard Daly, Petitioners Vs. City of Sparks, Case No. CV09-01895. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.5 Discussion and possible action on Sparks’ Legislative Platform and Policies October 2009 through September 2010 (Time: 4:44:43 p.m.)

Government Affairs Manager Rob Joiner stated this is the annual update of policies that affect how we relate to each other, the state legislature, the federal delegation, and inter-governmental relations. Per the Council’s direction, staff has added Redevelopment and Neighborhood Revitalization to the list of key projects (page 2) and some of the projects have been reorganized. He stated that based on the recently updated strategic plan, some of the platform and policy


Page 13 of 23

statements will be updated. Mr. Joiner noted there is also an updated list of current holders of office in the state legislature, assuming the incumbent is successfully re-elected. Council Member Ratti questioned the policy directing staff to oppose any legislation that requires the application of preferences to contracts by local governments (page 7, local government finance, item P. She stated the concern was that there would be additional costs associated with preferences. She said if we can do things that will keep our local construction industry working, perhaps we need to re-think our policy. Mr. Joiner stated there were very definitely specific reasons for opposing preferences, but times have changed and we can always soften our policy, if that is the direction of Council. Ms. Ratti said she would like to keep our options open, if possible. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve the Sparks Legislative Platform and Policies October 2009 through September 2010, with Item 3(p) edited from the document. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, YES. Council Member Schmitt, NO. Motion carried.

6.6 Discussion and possible action on setting federal fiscal year 2011

appropriation project requests and priorities (Time: 4:52:35 p.m.) Government Affairs Manager Rob Joiner said that as the 111th Congress finishes up, we are still in flux over our appropriations requests, earmarks, transportation concurrent resolutions, reauthorizations, and health care. However, we need to start looking forward to the 112th Congress beginning in 2010. Per our normal course of action, staff has developed a spreadsheet of priorities as determined by the Council. He then reviewed the priorities, per the staff report. Mr. Joiner noted a change in the staff report—the addition of a request for a project that would compliment the flood control project, but it would be an item specifically for Sparks: the North Truckee Drain Project. This is a $5 million request to realign and lower the drain. This would drop the flood elevation 18 inches. A discussion ensued regarding the proposed funding for the North Truckee Drain and the flood control project as a whole. A question was asked about why a request for funding of an arena in Sparks was not on the list. Mr. Joiner stated he was not aware of any request for this to be on our federal funding list. City Manager Carey stated that he would have staff investigate whether we could request federal funding for a private/public project. It was noted that funding for the arena were requested under stimulus funding, as a “shovel ready” project, but nothing was funded. Council Member Carrigan asked if we would “rebate” sewer fees being collected for the flood project if we received part of the funding from the federal government (the $5 million being requested. Utility Manager JoAnn Meacham stated that would not be out of the realm of possibility and she then discussed specifics on how the bonding/rate component might be affected by a potential government grant. Council Members noted their priorities on the funding list.


Page 14 of 23

A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to accept the report for setting federal fiscal year 2001 appropriation project requests and priorities, without the Pyramid Highway Corridor project and to direct staff to bring back to Council all of the alternatives for funding the Arena at the Sparks Marina. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) (Time: 5:22:24 p.m.) Government Affairs Analyst Kathy Clewett provided a summary of her written report, noting that we are getting about $840,000 in CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funding. Mr. Etchart also informed her that there is some discussion at the state level that some of the funds they received may be parceled out to local communities. The Police funding is coming along. The HUD (Housing and Urban Development) funded projects are going to the Purchasing Department for the bid process for the improvements along Prater. She stated the report also contains a summary of what NDOT (Nevada Department of Transportation) is doing with their funding and also what the State of Nevada website is reporting other entities received. She noted that staff is pursuing other funds as they become available.

6.8 Consideration and possible adoption of the City of Sparks Strategic Plan for

FY2010-2015 (Time: 5:24:14 p.m.) Administrative�Analyst Teresa Gardner gave a presentation on the updated Strategic Plan, stating the previous plan was adopted in August of 2007 and it included strategic goals and Council budget priorities (resource allocations). The Resource Allocations were updated in May of 2008. A team of employees (the Future Finders) worked on the strategic goals while senior staff worked on the resource allocations. The goals and the allocations were discussed at the Council workshop in 2008. Based on that discussion the plan was updated and presented to Council at a workshop in August of 2009. After that workshop all the goals were combined into one final document. She then outlined the Strategic Plan as follows: �

#��<!�� 1RA=(=�A=(,�

��7 ��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�


Page 15 of 23

�� !�M �#��6 �/��!�

(9 #�� 5 ��@��

(9(9 #�� % �� !� ��% ��+�!� !�� +�!�!��

�!��!+�� !�� !�!�� !�� !� ��% �� !��

��!��!9 �(9(9(9 �� !��+�� % �� !�� !9�

(9(9A9 �� !��% �� !��!��9�(9(9?9 7 � ��!��!��<��% �� !��+��!��!�� !�!�� !9�

A9 ��!�� % ��

A9(9 �!��!��!�� !� �� !+��!� +��+�� !��!��!��

� �� +�% �� !� �!!�� <!9�

A9(9(9 :�� !�� % ��+�% �<+��

��9�

?9 ��!�� % ��

?9(9 � !��<!E��!�� !�� !��!��

� �� !� �!!�� !�� !!�� <�� !��!��

� ��+� �� !��!9�

?9(9(9 � �� E!�� +�!��

�� % ��9�

)9 � ��

)9(9 @�� !�� +�� !�� +��

� ��!��<� �� !�� !�9�

)9(9(9 � ��>� !�� % �� !�� !�� !�

% �� !9�

Ms. Gardner then received comments from the Council and requested their consideration in adopting the strategic plan, as outlined. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to adopt the Strategic Plan, as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.9 Consideration and possible acceptance of cooperative agreement from the

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for Brownfields Assessment grant funding (Time: 5:29:12 p.m.)

Grant Administrator Tracy Wheeler noted this agreement was for two separate grants totaling $400,000 for Phase I and II assessments of potential hazardous substances and petroleum product contaminated sites throughout our Redevelopment Areas 1 and 2. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to accept the Brownfields Assessment cooperative agreement for grant funding from the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency as presented by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.10 Consideration and possible action on the Voluntary Separation Plan 09/10

(Time: 5:30:25 p.m.) Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson stated we continue to face economic challenges with an anticipated $3.1 million shortfall. The City Manager and staff are working on a multi-faceted attack on the budget shortfall and one of the things staff is asking the Council to consider is a


Page 16 of 23

voluntary separation plan for employees. She stated we had a very successful voluntary separation plan in 2007/08 and staff is recommending that plan once again be implemented. She noted that this plan is different from the previous plan—the biggest difference is that this is more generous. We looked at what some of the other organizations were offering and we heard from employees that it needed to be “richer” to be a serious consideration. She stated that the last time the voluntary separation plan included the elimination of the state insurance program for city retirees. That was a big incentive and this time she felt it was going to be a little tougher to get employees to buy into the program. Ms. Syverson stated the City is at the forefront of trying to head off economic challenges and that is why we are looking to implement this voluntary separation program now. Council Member Carrigan expressed concern regarding the cost of implementing the program versus the potential cost savings. He asked where the money for the “buy-out” would come from. City Manager Carey stated it would come from the budget for this year—we would utilize existing resources—the budgeted salaries of the employees leaving to substantially fund the buy-out. He stressed that in order for this plan to yield the best long-term results, he may be required to explain to the Council specific budget impacts as they become known; depending on what department employees come from and whether the reorganization requires a position change, etc. He said that the challenge is going to be that with a 22% reduction in our workforce, we will have to re-engineer and provide new ways of providing some services. Mayor Martini noted that there was a request to speak on this item. Mr. Dan Venters, a union representative, stated that his members are concerned that if the plan is approved, safeguards need to be put in place to ensure that the voluntary separations are done equally between all departments and through all bargaining units. He said many of his members are wondering why, after having to take 11 furlough days in FY 09/10, the City still has $1.6 million (which wasn’t available during negotiations) with which to pay for the VSP (Voluntary Separation Plan). Council Member Schmitt noted that the City only has the money because of the steps we took early on in 2008—these are cost savings, not new money. He said that the new property tax estimates will be coming out in December and while the estimates are in the range of $3 in lower tax revenue, he felt it would be a lot more. He said it is difficult to make budget cuts, but at the same time, we have to cut $3 million from our budget—we have no choice. He said if the economy continues in this same vein we will not be talking budget cuts, we will be talking about cutting out departments. Mayor Martini stated this program is voluntary and if it were not, we would be looking at mandatory lay-offs. He said it is painful to see long-time employees leaving employment with the City. Council Member Ratti agreed, stating that hopefully having some choices will make it easier for some folks along the way. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve the Voluntary Separation Plan 09/10, at 75% of base pay as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Page 17 of 23

6.11 Consideration and possible approval of an agreement to cooperate in the sale of Parcel A of Parcel Map 2773 being approximately 1.2 acres of City owned property (Time: 5:46:51 p.m.)

Property Agency Dave Vill stated that at the Council Meeting of October 12th he was asked to contact the Hurt family (the second party to this agreement) to see if they would be interested in the City retaining an option to purchase their property. After meeting with Mr. Hurt and his real estate representative, they declined to offer the city an option. They wanted to proceed with the agreement as written. Mr. Vill then reviewed the staff report, stating the city-owned parcel is land that is “left-over” from Fire Station #4 and the City has no plans for the property. He noted that under the agreement the Hurt family will assume all responsibility for the zoning, planning, surveying, etc. If they are successful in securing a buyer for the property, the City is only responsible for a preliminary title report and our share of the closing costs. The city will receive a prorated share of the gross proceeds from the sale, estimated at $8 to $11 per square foot. Council asked if the Hurt property had no value without the attached city parcel. Mr. Vill said it does not have the commercial value with out our parcel because our parcel has access to Disc Drive and their parcel does not. Council Member Schmitt noted that the city was recently approached by a non-profit organization asking for assistance with a acquiring a site on which to build a facility and we told them we did not have any property available. He said this would make an excellent site and he felt that rather than sell the property, we should consider the benefit to the community in donating it to a non-profit for a facility that would benefit the entire city. Mr. Schmitt also asked Mr. Vill for an inventory of city property. Council Member Carrigan asked if the agreement allowed the City to say no to a purchase offer if we did not like the offer. Mr. Vill said that yes, we did. In response to further questions, Mr. Vill noted the property value is estimated at between $500,000 and $600,000; however, the City has never tried to sell the parcel because it has not been determined that this is surplus property. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to decline entering into an Agreement to Cooperate in the sale of city-owned property. Council Members Ratti, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, NO. Motion carried.

6.12 Consideration and possible approval of a Lease Agreement and

Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Sparks and the Sparks Heritage Foundation and Museum, Inc., for the buildings located at 814 and 820 Victorian Avenue, Sparks, NV (Time: 3:14:39 p.m.) (This item was heard out of order.)

Public Works Director Wayne Seidel noted that this lease agreement was before the Council at the last meeting, at which time the Council voiced concerns regarding performance measures and expenses to the City on behalf of the museum. Mr. Seidel stated historically we pay about $9,500 per year for gas/water/power and about $9,000 per year for elevator inspections and maintenance of the building. He said it costs the City about $18,500 per year for the Museum to use the building. He noted that the Sparks Heritage Museum has been housed in this city-owned building since 1986 and the current lease agreement with the museum expired in 2006. Since


Page 18 of 23

that time the museum has operated under a month-to-month arrangement with the City. Staff has negotiated a new agreement with the Museum for continued use of the building through 2039, with two ten-year optional extensions. The lease includes allowing the museum to expand to the second floor of the building and for certain areas of the building to be used by the City for meetings and storage (primarily related to special events). The City will continue to provide water/sewer/electric/gas utilities for five years, but after that, the Museum will be responsible for these utilities. The City will continue to maintain the elevator and provide janitorial services. Mr. Seidel noted that the agreement also requires the Museum Foundation to provide annual reports that include a review of their business plan, visitor counts, and the number of volunteer hours. Real Property Agent Dave Vill commented that the original leases with the museum were very simple, with little detail. However, the proposed new lease is much more performance laden. Council Member Carrigan asked for clarification on who owns the building. Mr. Vill stated the City of Sparks owns the building and we acquired it from Washoe County—initially under a 99 year lease with the stipulation it be used for a museum and then in 1996, the County actually signed over ownership to the City. Mr. Carrigan suggested that the City should consider giving ownership of the building to the Museum Foundation and then they would be responsible for the utilities and maintenance—the only stipulation would be that if the museum ceased to operate in the building, ownership would revert back to the City of Sparks. Mr. Vill stated all the Museum would need to do would be to make an offer on the building and that offer would be brought before the Council for acceptance. If the offer was accepted by the Council, the lease would be terminated and the building would belong to the Museum. Council Member Schmitt thanked staff for their information on the utilities and asked if they had a month-by-month breakdown of the costs for the past year. Mr. Seidel provided the average yearly costs of $18,500. Council Member Schmitt stated he wanted a monthly breakdown of how much money we have spent on this building for the last five years. He also asked for their business plan. Mr. Vill noted that their business plan is still in draft form because they did not have the costs for the proposed lease in final form. Anthea Humphreys, the Manager of the Sparks Museum explained, that the Museum has only occupied the second floor of the Museum for the past year—prior to that it was occupied by the Parks and Recreation Department (Special Events). She noted that the costs for the building were not broken down between the Special Events and the Museum prior to last year. She stated she has been working on the business plan for the past two years and once they acquired the use of the upstairs area they applied for a Museum Assessment Grant from the Institute of Museums and Library Studies, which is a federally funded program. Under this grant, museum professionals oversee a self-assessment of individual museums and they have spent the last 10 months going through every aspect of the museums operations. They are currently waiting for the final report from the museum professional so that they can finalize their comprehensive business and strategic plan. Council Member Schmitt expressed concern that we are setting a policy regarding allowing non-profit agencies to use City buildings at no cost to the non-profit—with the City paying for


Page 19 of 23

utilities, etc. He said we need to set a fair market value for the building—even if that value is based on the benefit of museum to our City and in particular the down-town tourist area. Council Member Schmitt asked if there were any issues that would be affected if the approval of the lease were postponed. Mr. Vill said that the museum has been awarded a grant to replace the HVAC system in the amount of $105,000 which is subject to the approval of the lease and subject to the sale of State bonds. Ms. Humphreys emphasized that it is not uncommon for cities and museums to work in partnerships like this. She emphasized that this is a volunteer organization and there are benefits to the city with regard to tourism and the pride of citizens in our city’s history. She noted that the museum has received several grants in the past to renovate the building and they anticipate future grants that will allow them to make further renovations and updates to the building. Council Member Salerno stated he felt the City owed it to the citizens of Sparks to make sure that the museum continues. He said the museum is a valuable asset to the City and to our efforts to increase tourism. Council Member Carrigan asked Ms. Humphreys if the Museum would be averse to taking over ownership of the building. Ms. Humphreys said that decision would have to be made by the Museum’s Board of Directors. A discussion ensued regarding the legal ramifications of transferring the ownership of the museum building. The consensus was that as long as the use of the building remained a museum, there were no legal barriers to changing the ownership of the building to the museum. Council Member Schmitt emphasized that it wasn’t that he did not want to see a museum in this building, but that he wanted to see cost controls in place so that the taxpayers were protected from unreasonable expenses. Council Member Ratti said she does strategic planning and business planning for non-profit organizations and she commended the museum for doing the museum assessment. She said the idea of turning over ownership is intriguing, the practical side is that taking over a building is a very big step. She encouraged the City to stay involved with the museum for at least the next five or so years to support them and encourage them in building an endowment fund that would allow them to have the resources to take care of the building in the future. She said the building is a historical to the entire community and it would irresponsible of the City to hand them the building and hope for the best. She said the museum will be in a much stronger position for receiving grants and other funding by having a City as a supportive partner; until such time as they have a track record of being able to support the costs of owning the building. Ms. Ratti said she supports approval of the lease with a review every two years and that we have a staff liaison on the board. Mayor Martini then opened the floor for public comment and the following individuals spoke in support of the museum lease:


Page 20 of 23

Kayla Kokkonen Neil Cobb Dick Dreiling Dr. Richard Simmonds Charlie Vinopal Marvin Hoffman Antoinette Hoffman The following individuals were present in support of the museum lease, but did now wish to speak: Laurie Leonard Billie Walker Janice Ryan James F. Miller Jerry Lock Corinne Summerfield Coleen Ede Les Ede Lyle Haven Nancy Streets Rita Phelps Mary Kokkonen Beverly Railey George Volk Nancy Kee Attorney Adams expressed concern regarding selling the building and possible legal ramifications. He recommended approving the lease per staff recommendations and then revisiting the options regarding the building’s ownership at a later date. Council Member Ratti expressed concern that any amendments to staff’s recommendation for approval would put the museum’s grant in jeopardy. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve the Memorandum of Understanding and the Lease Agreement between the City of Sparks and the Sparks Heritage Foundation and Museum as presented and direct staff to work with the Museum on recommendations regarding ownership options for the building, with a person from the City Council as a liaison. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Smith, Schmitt, NO. Motion carried.

6.13 Consideration and possible approval of Resolution No. 3166, Authorizing the

execution of the waiver and consent to in connection with the issuance of the “Redevelopment Agency of the City of Sparks, Nevada, subordinate Lien Tax Increment Bonds (Redevelopment Area No. 2) Series 2009” by the Redevelopment Agency of the Cit of Sparks, Nevada (Time: 5:56:05 p.m.)

Finance Director Tom Minton stated that this waiver will allow the issuance of the proposed 2009 TIF bonds for the Legends Development. The waiver states that the 2009 TIF bonds were not contemplated in the current agreement and adds the 2008 and 2009 bonds as city proceeds to the project that are calculated into any possible STAR bond short-fall, should that occur, and for any future bond issues or any other TIF issues to be taken into account to determine the bonding capacity of the project, based on their revenues. Attorney Adams asked if this would have an impact on the City’s ability to issue additional bonds for this redevelopment area. Mr. Minton said it would have an impact because the bonds are based on the capacity of the area to produce revenue to re-pay the bonds.


Page 21 of 23

A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve Resolution No. 3166, and allow the issuance of bonds to proceed. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Ratti, Carrigan, NO. Motion carried.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning:

7.1 Second Reading, Public Hearing and possible approval of Bill No. 2611, amending the Sparks Municipal Code relating to the exercise of first amendment rights on public property; declaring that the City has a substantial governmental interest in regulating certain matters on public property; clarifying certain provisions; and providing other matters properly related thereto (CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 12, 2009) (Time: 6:00:35 p.m.)

Senior Assistant City Attorney Tom Riley noted that this ordinance is in response to a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision which allowed governmental entities to clarify their powers under conditions where someone might want to engage in first amendment activities (rallies and protests, etc.). He said we need to keep our municipal codes current so that we don’t inadvertently commit unconstitutional acts toward a person/or group engaged in first amendment activities. He said the ordinance clarifies what constitutes a compelling governmental interest. He said the intent of the ordinance is to give the police and parks departments some advanced notice of any rallies or marches and also provides the city with additional controls during large demonstrations or rallies. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding this proposed ordinance. Ms. Leigh Rolland, the Northern Coordinator for the ACLU of Nevada, stated that although the changes being made were very minor, they appreciated being included in our ordinance process. There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve Bill No. 2611 (Ordinance No. ______). Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

7.2 Public hearing, consideration of and possible City Council consent for the Redevelopment Agency to enter into the Legends Improvements Purchase and Sale Agreement for $6,000,000 (Time: 6:07:52 p.m.)

Community Development Director Neil Krutz noted that this was a companion item for the bond resolution—the purchase and sale agreement. This outlines what the city is proposing to acquire from the $6 million in net bond proceeds we anticipate coming from the sale. This is very similar to the process we went through for the first round of TIF bonds for the project when we bought $9.25 million worth of pedestrian improvements on the pedestrian plaza. Mr. Krutz discussed the components the city will purchase and emphasized that a key element of the agreement is that the developer is required to maintain all the public improvements in a working manner and make them available to the public. He emphasized that the public improvements are


Page 22 of 23

reimbursed at the developer’s cost. Mr. Krutz stated that there are two findings the Council must make in order to give consent for the bond sale: 1) that these improvements will benefit the redevelopment area, and 2) that no other reasonable means of financing is available to make this happen. He said this bond sale will allow the developer to leverage those funds with his own towards the financing of the new cinema, to include the Imax theater. City Manager Carey stated that the City of Sparks Redevelopment Agency No. 1 did participate with redevelopment tax increment funds in the construction of the Victorian Plaza, the parking garage, and the fountain. This particular component is part of the redevelopment at the Legends, one that will be much larger with the increment we are approving today. He said he wanted to ensure it was understood that we are purchasing public improvements within the central plaza area. This phase will be followed by additional phases by the developer and the City will issue additional STAR bonds and eventually we may be called upon to issue additional increment to carry out the overall vision of the project. Council Member Ratti said she felt there was a difference between the public improvements at the Legends and the ones at Victorian Square, in that we will be selling the public improvements back to the developer. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to consent to the Redevelopment Agency entering into the Legends Improvements Purchase and Sale Agreement as presented by staff, and based upon the information in the staff report and discussed at the meeting with regard to the Purchase and Sale Agreements, to find that: (a) Such acquisition benefits the redevelopment area as contemplated by NRS 279.486, and; (b) No other reasonable means of financing the land and building is available. Council Members Salerno, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Members Ratti, Carrigan, NO. Motion carried. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items:

8.1 Consideration and possible removal from the table of a request to annex 30.23 acres in the East Truckee River Canyon that was tabled by the City Council on September 14, 2009, in order to receive more information from the applicant (ITEM TO BE HEARD AT THE NOVEMBER 9, 2009, CITY COUNCIL MEETING) (Time: 6:17:29 p.m.)

Community Development Director Neil Krutz stated that this item was on the agenda at the request of Council Member Ron—to consider removing the annexation request from the table and placing it on the November 9th agenda for discussion and possible action. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding this proposed annexation. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to remove from the table a request to annex 30.23 acres in the East Truckee River Canyon that was tabled by the City Council on September 14, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Page 23 of 23

9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 6:19:29 p.m.) Council Member Ron Schmitt requested that a resolution or policy be brought forward in terms of contracts/leases—that they don’t come to Council signed. Agreements should be brought to Council for comments prior to being signed. 10. *Adjournment (Time: 6:20:25 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m. ______________________________ Mayor ___________________________________

City Clerk >>>

Page 1 of 8

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 3:00 P.M. Monday, November 9, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:04:12 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:04 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:04:19 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, Acting City Attorney Doug Thornley, PRESENT. Attorney Chet Adams, ABSENT. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:04:39 p.m.) The invocation was given by Pastor Barb West of the Sparks Church of the Nazarene. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:06:10 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Acting City Attorney Doug Thornley. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:06:39 p.m.) None. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:06:49 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve the agenda as posted. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: Regular Meeting of October 12, 2009. (Time: 3:07:22 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 12, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Presentation on trip to Ireland by members of the Sparks All Star Band (Time: 3:08:00 p.m.)

City Manager Carey noted that the Band Director for Reed High School asked that this item be continued to the November 23, 2009, meeting.

4.2 Proclamation – American Indian Heritage Month (Time: 3:08:31 p.m.)

Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming November 2009, as American Indian Heritage Month, in recognition of the importance of integral role American Indian heritage plays in the

Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting for November 9, 2009

Page 2 of 8

history of the State of Nevada and the City of Sparks. The Proclamation was accepted by Utility Manager JoAnn Meacham on behalf of the Multicultural Awareness Committee (MAC).

4.3 Presentation on Police and Fire Department Levels of Service (Time: 3:09:53

p.m.) Fire Chief Andy Flock and Acting Police Chief Steve Keefer each gave a presentation regarding the levels of service in their respective departments.

5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:45:36 p.m.)

Items 5.2 and 5.7 were pulled for discussion and separate votes. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve Consent Items 5.1, 5.3 through 5.6, 5.8 and 5.9. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

5.1 Report of Claims and Bills approved for payment and the appropriation transfers are for the period October 8, 2009, through October 21, 2009



for United Coin Machine Company dbat Victorian Penny Park, located at 1114 Victorian Ave., Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Robert Alvin Woodson (Time: 3:46:33 p.m.)

An agenda item from Sparks Police Department recommending the City Council approve an application for a Gaming License for The Victorian Penny Park. United Coin is a licensed Slot Route Vendor with several current gaming licenses throughout the area. The license will provide a $1,920.00 annual fee for sixteen upright nickel slot machines and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report. Council Member Carrigan noted that that staff report says this is a non restricted gaming license and he asked if it was one of the licenses that was “grandfathered in” and therefore not affected by the changes in where gaming is allowed in the City of Sparks. City Attorney Thornley confirmed that it was a grandfathered location inside the Buffalo Bar—the penny slots. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve Consent Items 5.2. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Carrigan, NO. Motion carried.

5.3 Request for consideration and possible approval to authorize the Fire Department to pursue a Fire Prevention & Safety Grant through the federal 2009 Fire Act Grant process.

An agenda item from Fire Marshal Robert King recommending the City Council authorize the Fire Department to pursue a grant for funds to implement a smoke alarm installation program—Project SAFE. There are no matching fund requirements for this grant.


Page 3 of 8

5.4 Consideration and possible approval of the destruction/disposal of original building plans and associated documents that have been microfilmed (Community Development Department).

An agenda item from Records Specialist Donna DiCarlo recommending the City Council approve the destruction of documents that have been microfilmed in accordance with City policy and State law. Details of the documents are listed in the staff report.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of Change Order No. 1 of the 2008/2009

Permanent Patch Program, Bid No. 08/09-001, PWP No. WA-2008-355, to Q&D Construction, Inc. in the amount of $72,607

An agenda item from Transportation Manager Jon Ericson recommending the City Council approve additional funding for permanent patching as a result of construction at Wright Way and 5th Street. The contractor was required to place new water mainline and gas lines down 5th Street. The Permanent Patch Program is self-funded; however, due to the quantity of patching, staff felt the street should be re-surfaced, rather than just patched. Staff negotiated with the Contractor for the additional work; however, once the asphalt was removed, the subgrade was found to be in very poor condition. Additional costs resulted from the need to over-excavate and extra six inches and replace the aggregate base. Funding for the additional costs is available in the Street Rehabilitation fund.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval of a Reversion to Acreage Map for property located at 521 and 529 18th Street for the Lopes Family Revocable Living Trust

An agenda item from City Surveyor Andy Fuller recommending the City Council approve a reversion to acreage map to eliminate interior lot lines conflicting with an existing building. The map has been checked and found to be technically correct and the appropriate fees have been paid.

5.7 Consideration and possible award of the Informal Quote, for the Larkin

Circle Improvements Project, to Atlas Contractors, in the amount of $84,100 (Time: 3:47:47 p.m.)

An agenda item from Transportation Manager Jon Ericson recommending the City Council award the informal quote for Larkin Circle improvements to Atlas Contractors. This roadway has become a safety and maintenance issue with the current pavement condition index at zero. The proposed 1-1/2 inch overlay will help alleviate the safety concerns and this will be an interim repair until the North Truckee Drain realignment project has been completed and the roadway can be completely reconstructed to today’s standards. Funding is available from budget appropriations in the Road Ahead Program. Council Member Schmitt expressed concern that this project was not in the approved CIP and that it would be a waste of money to improve this street when it is scheduled to be cut in the Spring of 2011 and rebuilt by RTC in the Fall of 2011. Mr. Ericson noted that this street is in very poor condition and will probably not last for another two or three years, particularly since a trucking company has recently moved into this industrial area and will now be using the street. He said staff is proposing to do a 6 foot wide patch of just


Page 4 of 8

the travel lanes. He noted that the funding was originally intended for a project on Shadow Lane; however, there are some problems with the utilities on Shadow Lane which has delayed that project indefinitely and that funding is now being used for the Larkin Circle project. Mr. Ericson noted that this project was listed in the CIP as a needed project, but not funded. Council Member Salerno noted that he asked staff to look into what could be done for Larkin Circle because of numerous complaints he had received regarding the condition of the roadway. He said this is just a band aid on the roadway until it can be reconstructed in two or three years. Council Member Schmitt stated he was not going to support this project because it was not part of the approved CIP and the funding was coming from another project that was on the approved CIP. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to award the Informal Quote for the Larkin Circle Improvements Project to Atlas Contractors, in the amount of $84,100. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, YES. Council Members Carrigan, Schmitt, NO. Motion carried.

5.8 Consideration and possible approval of the contract for Professional Services

with Michael D. Buschelman Consulting Inc. for water right consulting and related work for the City of Sparks for an amount not to exceed $25,000

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Janelle Tomas recommending the City Council approve a professional services agreement for water rights consulting. This contract will provide services on an as needed basis to protect the City’s water rights. Funds have been budgeted for these services through the Utilities fund.


Agreements as presented by staff for a total of 25.0 acre-feet of water rights in the amount of $175,000 plus one half of the closing costs, which is approximated at $1,000

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Janelle Tomas recommending the City Council approve the a water rights purchase with Annapurna Capital Partners for potential future use by the City. Funds are available in the Sewer Enterprise Fund budget for this purchase.


6.1 Consideration and possible acceptance of a grant from the E. L. Cord Foundation in the amount of $51,000 for the City of Sparks Parks and Recreation Department to continue the Leisure Without Limits Program for people with disabilities in 2010 (Time: 3:53:52 p.m.)

Recreation Superintendent Tracy Domingues thanked the E.L. Cord Foundation for funding this program and noted that this is the second year we have received such a grant. She stated that E.L. Cord Foundation has made it clear that they are not a source of continual support for this program and she is working on other funding grants for 2011.


Page 5 of 8

A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to accept a grant from the E. L. Cord Foundation in the amount of $51,000. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.2 Consideration and possible approval of the Mayor’s recommendation of

appointment to the Sparks Advisory Committee for the Disabled (Time: 3:56:17 p.m.)

City Manager Shaun Carey noted we are short one member on the Advisory Committee for the Disabled. Ten applications were received and after brief interviews with seven of the applicants, the Mayor is recommending that Yvonne Flynn be appointed to fill the vacant position on this committee. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to confirm the appointment of Yvonne Flynn to the Sparks Advisory Committee for the Disabled. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.3 Consideration and possible approval of renewing the city’s membership with

the Sparks Chamber of Commerce for fiscal year 2009-2010 (Time: 3:57:16 p.m.)

City Manager Shaun Carey noted that the Council has requested that each of the City’s memberships be brought forward separately for discussion and possible approval. The City’s membership in the Sparks Chamber of Commerce for this fiscal year is $850.00 and staff is recommending that the membership renewal be approved. Council Member Carrigan expressed concern that he missed a ribbon cutting for an event in his ward this past weekend because he was not notified and he asked that the Chamber be more proactive in notifying the City Council Members of business activities and events being held in their respective wards. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve renewing the city’s membership with the Sparks Chamber of Commerce for fiscal year 2009-2010 in the amount of $850.00. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.4 Consideration and possible acceptance of the American Recovery and

Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) in the amount of $840,000 (Time: 3:59:13 p.m.)

Deputy Public Works Director Pete Etchart noted that the primary objective of this grant is to increase and promote energy efficiency, energy conservation, and renewable energy generation within the City of Sparks. We are initially focus on the governmenta/public sector. Implementation is focusing on some of the projects we can do right away and designing projects for the future. The highest return on our available energy funds are in the area of energy efficient and energy conservation type projects such as LED street and traffic lights and lighting and energy retrofits at our existing facilities. We are also designing projects for the future, such as the garage lighting replacements and boiler replacements. We will also be working on renewable energy generation, such as the photovoltaic projects at the Police Department and


Page 6 of 8

Golden Eagle Regional Park. Mr. Etchart emphasized that the key is to be flexible and take advantage of funding as it becomes available. Council Member Salerno asked if the City receives any type of rebate for using less energy. Mr. Etchart noted that NV Energy has a couple of program rebates available and he briefly discussed the recent changes in their rebate program. Mr. Etchart thanked all the City staff who helped obtain this grant, as well as those who are helping to spend and track the funding. In response to additional questions from Council Members, Mr. Etchart noted that there are no matching funds required for this grant, but there are specific reporting requirements. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to accept the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) in the amount of $840,000. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.5 Consideration and possible approval of removing the tax lien on 321 9th

Street (Time: 4:09:28 p.m.) Assistant City Attorney Doug Thornley noted that Mr. Aboumrad is asking the City Council to remove a lien the City placed on his property for unpaid sewer fees over the past five years. He said that staff believes that the lien is the “carrot” that will get the outstanding balance on the sewer account paid and this is why the Sewer Appeals Board did not recommend that the lien be removed. Attorney Thornley stated staff is recommending that no new penalties be applied to the account (frozen) and that when the account is paid in full, the penalties will be waived and the lien will be removed. Mr. Aboumrad is asking that the lien be removed before the account is paid in full so that he can refinance the property. Utility Manager JoAnn Meacham noted that the City has about 1,200 sewer accounts that have liens on them and our total outstanding receivables is approximately $1 million. She emphasized that the total revenue risk [in removing the lien] is more than this one customer. Mr. Aboumrad presented his appeal, stating that he is trying to refinance the property and has recently made improvements to the property. However, if the property does not appraise high enough, he will not have enough capital to pay off the lien, the property taxes and other issues owning on the property. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding exactly how much Mr. Aboumrad owed the City and the consequences to the City if they chose to release the lien. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to deny the appeal and keep the lien in place on 321 9th Street until the account is paid in full. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.6 First reading and possible discussion of CA-5-09 Bill No. 2612 An ordinance by the City of Sparks amending Title 20 of the Sparks Municipal Code to


Page 7 of 8

allow for Electric theft deterrent devices with defined criteria in the I (Industrial) zoning district (Time: 4:28:20 p.m.)

Acting City Clerk Carrie Brooks read Bill No. 2612 by title. Mayor Martini announced that the public hearing and second reading of this bill would take place at the regular City Council meeting of November 23, 2009.

6.7 First reading and possible discussion of Bill No. 2613, An ordinance

amending title 15 of the Sparks Municipal Code including but not limited to adopting by reference the IEC section 60335-2-76 Edition 2.1 and providing other matters properly related thereto (Time: 4:28: p.m.)

Acting City Clerk Carrie Brooks read Bill No. 2613 by title. Mayor Martini announced that the public hearing and second reading of this bill would take place at the regular City Council meeting of November 23, 2009.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: None. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items:

8.1 Public Hearing, 2nd Reading, discussion and possible action of PCN09018, Bill No. 2610, an ordinance for a voluntary Annexation request, in accordance with the City of Sparks 7 year Annexation Program, by Tahoe Reno Commercial Center, LLC, for a parcel 30.23 acres in size generally located west of the USA Parkway interchange, east of the Patrick Interchange, shares the southern property line with the right of way of Interstate 80’s west bound lanes and is approximately 10.5 miles east of the intersection of Vista Boulevard and Interstate 80 within the City of Sparks Sphere of Influence. Upon Annexation the zoning would convert from a Washoe County Designation of Industrial to a City of Sparks zoning designation of I (Industrial) (Time: 4:29:50 p.m.)

Senior Planner Jim Rundle reviewed the history of this annexation request, noting that it was tabled to allow the applicant time to provide additional information requested by Council. He stated the Planning Commission is recommending denial of the annexation request. He stated that to date, the applicant has not provided any additional information to staff. Council asked the applicant if he needed more time to provide information to the Council. Mr. Robleski stated he did not believe he needed more time. He noted that there was a corridor study that has just been completed which is recommending a new interchange on I-80 which would provide access to his property and which is now part of the RTC 20/40 plan. Mr. Robleski stated they have a lot of plans for the property and they are anxious to accomplish the annexation so they can go forward with their project. Council expressed concern that staff had not reviewed the study Mr. Robleski was referring to and recommended that this annexation request be continued to the next meeting. Mr. Robleski stated he was in favour of a continuance.


Page 8 of 8

Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding this annexation request. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to continue this annexation request to the next council meeting (November 23, 2009). Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 4:35:04 p.m.) City Manager Shaun Carey announced vacancies on the Citizens Advisory Committee and the Sparks Planning Commission. Council Member Schmitt requested an update on the CIP (Capital Improvement Projects). 10. *Adjournment (Time: 4:42:46 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:42 p.m. _______________________________ Mayor __________________________________ City Clerk >>>

Page 1 of 14

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 3:00 P.M. Monday, November 23, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to Order (Time: 3:01:30 p.m.) The regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:01 p.m. 2. *Roll Call (Time: 3:01:39 p.m.) Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt, City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Council Member Phillip Salerno, ABSENT. Staff Present: Tom Miller, Steve Driscoll, Andy Flock, Neil Krutz, Stan Sherer, Armando Ornelas, Jim Rundle, Adam Mayberry, Joe Grogan. Invocation Speaker: (Time: 3:02:06 p.m.) The invocation was given by Pastor Tom Butler from Sparks Methodist Church. Pledge of Allegiance (Time: 3:03:14 p.m.) The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mr. Perry DiLoreto. *Comments from the Public (Time: 3:03:37 p.m.) Mr. Ray Buyher, representing the Reno Racing Pigeon Club, spoke about the Sparks Municipal Code and changing it so that residents may keep homing pigeons in the City of Sparks. Approval of the Agenda (Time: 3:07:46 p.m.) Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the agenda as posted. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: Regular Meeting of October 26, 2009 (Time: 3:08:30 p.m.) A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 26, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Presentation to the Nevada Fallen Patriot Fund (Time: 3:09:30 p.m.) Members of the Iron Nation Motor Cycle Club presented a check for $17,000 to Mr. Perry DiLoreto for Nevada Fallen Patriot Fund. These funds were raised through their “Never Forget” ride. The fund was started after we lost our first soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq to provide benefits to the families they left behind. A staff member from Congressman Dean Heller’s office

Regular City Council Meeting Minutes for November 23, 2009

Page 2 of 14

presented certificates of special recognition to the Nevada Patriot Fund and the Iron Nation Motor Cycle Club for their support of our troops. 4.2 Commendation to McDonalds (Time: 3:20:35 p.m.) Chair of the Sparks Advisory Committee for the Disabled, Laura Sheldon-Casson, presented a Commendation to the McDonald’s Restaurant on Prater Way for their excellent accessibility and service for the disabled.

4.3 Presentation on trip to Ireland by members of the Sparks All Star Band (Time: 3:26:49 p.m.)

Reed High School Band Leader Mr. Hollenbeck gave a brief review and thanked the City Council for their support of the Sparks All Star Band on their recent trip to the music festival in Longford, Ireland.

4.4 Presentation of Washoe County School Superintendent Heath Morrison and briefing on School District issues (Time: 3:36:20 p.m.)

Washoe County School Superintendent Heath Morrison gave a briefing on Washoe County School issues. Mayor Martini acknowledged Assistant City Manager Steve Driscoll’s achievement in receiving an Association of Collegiate Business School and Programs Student and Leadership Award from the University of Phoenix. 5. Consent Items: (Time: 3:50:17 p.m.) Item 5.2 was pulled for discussion and separate vote. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Consent Items 5.1 and 5.3 through 5.8. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

5.1 Report of Claims and Bills approved for payment and the appropriation transfers are for the period October 22, 2009, through November 4, 2009


5.2 Consideration and possible approval of Change Order #1 for additional costs

incurred due to permitting delays associated with the Pioneer Dam Reconstruction Project, PWP WA-2009-352 with Peavine Construction in the amount of $212,020 for a final contract amount of $1,182,870 (Time: 3:51:04 p.m.)

An agenda item from Civil Engineer Andrew Hummel recommending the City Council approve a change order for the Pioneer Dam Reconstruction Project. Council Member Schmitt asked for a report from staff on this item. Public Works Director Wayne Seidel noted that the City was notified several months ago that we needed permits to work in the River. We were expecting them [to be processed by] the first week in September because we had five weeks of work. Because we did not receive the permits from the Corps of


Page 3 of 14

Engineers and the Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, the project had to be put on hold until the river flow is lower, next June or July. Staff anticipates completing the project by the end of August, 2010. Council Member Schmitt asked why the contract was issued when we did not have the permits. Mr. Seidel stated that staff has been working with both regulatory agencies on the permits for over a year and we anticipated that the permits would be processed so the work could be done this fall. Unfortunately we did not receive the support we expected from the Fish and Wildlife division and the permits have been delayed. In response to questions from Council, it was noted that the additional funding is coming from the storm drain funds. Council Member Schmitt said he was going to vote to approve this, but he cautioned staff that we need to make sure we have permits in hand before we award contracts. Council Member Carrigan asked if it was Nevada or Federal Fish and Wildlife that was holding up the permits. Mr. Seidel stated it was the U.S. Fish and Wildlife—they are waiting for a biological opinion. Mr. Seidel stated there was a discussion regarding fish monitoring which was part of the White Water Park that we are required to do. Truckee Meadows Water Authority (TMWA) is doing the Glendale Intake next summer and we want to have this project finished and out of the way before they start their project. Mr. Seidel stated that we are partnering with TMWA for the monitoring, but the U.S. Fish and Wildlife wanted to see the whole monitoring program, even knowing that we are going to take one to five years to do the monitoring program after the project is built. Mr. Seidel noted that “we have learned our lesson and won’t count our chickens before they hatch” again. Mayor Martini said he felt that this issue relates back to the whitewater park and that it is a personal vendetta against the City of Sparks by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife because they did nto want the whitewater park. However, we finally got it through and this is “payback.” In a normal process this permit would have been issues and should have been issued, but they held it up on purpose. Mr. Schmitt said he agreed with Mayor Martini—that the Fish and Wildlife is not a fair playing field. However, we are stewards of tax-payer’s money and we have to pay an additional $212,000+ for a staff error. A motion was made by Council Member Schmitt, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Consent Item 5.2, Change Order #1 to Peavine Construction for additional costs incurred due to permitting delays associated with the Pioneer Dam Reconstruction Project, in the amount of $212,020. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

5.3 Consideration and possible award of the 1212 Victorian Avenue (Simons

Building) Demolition Project to Empire Contractors LLC, CIP 9067, in the amount of $41,725

An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending the City Council award the bid for demolition to Empire Contractors. The city purchased the building as part of the Victorian Square redevelopment project. The building poses safety issues as it remains


Page 4 of 14

vacant and must be demolished in order to redevelop this area of Victorian Avenue. Funding is budgeted in the CIP for this project.

5.4 Consideration and possible approval of the Memorandum adding Real

Property to Scope of Agreement to the Master Service Agreement for Treated Effluent between the City of Sparks and Spanish Springs Associates Limited Partnership, a Nevada Limited Partnership

An agenda item from Utility Manager JoAnn Meacham recommending the City Council approve an amendment to a master service agreement for treated effluent with Spanish Springs Associates to increase the area of the development covered under the service agreement by 100 acres. The developer is not requesting an additional volume of effluent to serve the increase in acreage, but is planning to implement conservation measures within the development in order to serve the area with the volume of effluent currently allocated to the development. There is no financial impact to the City.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of the Customer Service Agreement for

Treated Effluent (#2) (Phase 2) with Kiley Ranch Preservancy Foundation, a Nevada nonprofit corporation

An agenda item from Utility Manager JoAnn Meacham recommending the City Council approve an effluent service agreement with Kiley Ranch Preservancy Foundation (KRPF). The KRPF has negotiated with Kiley Ranch Communities for the use of 100 acre feet of effluent to serve the wetland preserve for 11 years and 70 acre feet in perpetuity. KRPF will pay the $76,036.80 connection fee through a Question 1 Grant from the State of Nevada, Division of Lands. Usage fees will be paid by Kiley Ranch Communities pursuant to the agreement.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval of a professional consulting services

contract for the design of a Photovoltaic System at the Golden Eagle Regional Park Main Concession Building, to H&K Architects, in the amount of $27,000, using funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG)

An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending the City Council approve a contract for the design of a photovoltaic system at Golden Eagle main concession building. H&K Architects will provide a full design for a roof mounted photovoltaic system on the main concession building at the park. This is one of many projects approved by the Department of Energy for funding through block grant funding as noted above.


contract for the design of the Alf Sorenson Boiler Replacement, to H&K Architects, in the amount of $26,000, using funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG)

An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending the City Council approve a contract for the design of a boiler replacement at the Alf Sorenson Community Center. H&K Architects will provide a full design for an energy efficient boiler system at the community center. Due to the complexity of the system, it is recommended that the system be redesigned to be more energy efficient before it is replaced. This is one of many projects approved by the Department of Energy for funding through block grant funding.


Page 5 of 14


contract for the design of the City of Sparks Maintenance Building Boiler Replacement, to H&K Architects, in the amount of $31,000, using funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG)

An agenda item from Capital Projects Manager Chris Cobb recommending the City Council approve a contract for the design of a boiler replacement at the maintenance building. H&K Architects will provide a full design for an energy efficient boiler system at the maintenance building on 21st Street. The original system was designed and installed in the mid 1960’s. the new system is proposed to have two new high efficiency boilers, a constant flow pumping system, and modification of the control system. This is one of many projects approved by the Department of Energy for funding through block grant funding.


6.1 Discussion and possible direction to the Sparks Citizens Advisory Committee (Time: 4:00:21 p.m.)

Community Relations Manager Adam Mayberry provided an update on the Sparks Citizens Advisory Committee appointment process. It was noted that some of the applicants already serve on other Sparks boards and Commissions, which is not allowed. It was clarified that the Council has the option to waive this rule, if they wished. The Council asked that the November 30th deadline for applications to this committee be retained, even if all Council Wards are not covered.

6.2 Consideration and possible approval of a cooperative agreement for the

Court of Antiquity Interpretive Area between the City of Sparks, Washoe County, and Nevada Department of Transportation (Time: 4:07:03 p.m.)

Parks and Recreation Director Stan Sherer stated the proposed agreement is for the “Court of Antiquity Interpretive Area” is a site about 3.5 miles east of Sparks, right on the Truckee River (next to the abandoned rest area off I-80). The site has about 200 petro glyphs and was a major meeting place for Native Americans. The purpose of the agreement will recognize the cultural/historical benefit to the community that this site has and also to enable the Nevada Rock Art Foundation to solicit funds for the eventual development of the site. He emphasized that there is no financial obligation associated with this agreement. Council Member Schmitt asked why they needed our approval in order to solicit funding. Mr. Sherer stated if grantors are aware that if government entities are committed to maintaining and preserving this area, the foundation will have better success in soliciting funds. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve a cooperative agreement for the Court of Antiquity Interpretive Area between the City of Sparks, Washoe County, and Nevada Department of Transportation. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.3 Consideration and possible approval of the proposed Interlocal Agreement

between City of Sparks, City of Reno, and Washoe County for General Park Maintenance (Time: 4:12:03 p.m.)


Page 6 of 14

Parks and Recreation Director Stan Sherer noted that the governing bodies directed staff to develop an interlocal agreement that called for shared services. The agreement concentrates on training; joint purchasing opportunities; sharing of equipment; sharing of personnel; marketing; and the management of different facilities. He said the opportunity for shared services is much greater between Washoe County and the City of Reno because Washoe County has more facilities within the Reno city limits. Sparks does not have that same opportunity, with the exception of the interpretive area at Golden Eagle and Lazy Five parks. However, formalizing this agreement will provide some new opportunities, as well as maintain current shared services practices. Council Member Ratti asked if this agreement included opportunities for shared services with the School District. Mr. Sherer stated there is currently a reciprocal use agreement with the School District; however, each agency has a separate agreement with the school district and the School District was not part of this agreement.

A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to approve the proposed Interlocal Agreement between City of Sparks, City of Reno, and Washoe County for General Park Maintenance. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.4 PCN06077, Discussion and possible action on a request from Synergy Golf

Holdings on a site approximately 157 acres in size in the PD (Planned Development – D’Andrea) zoning district generally located east of the intersection of Vista Boulevard and North D’Andrea Parkway, Sparks Nevada:

A. Final Approval of an amendment to a planned development handbook (D’Andrea)

B. Tentative Map request to allow for a 72-unit single family residential subdivision (Monticello) (Time: 4:14:44 p.m.)

Senior Planner Tim Thompson stated there were two requests associated with this applicant. The first is the final approval of an amendment to the D’Andrea handbook and the second is approval of a tentative map request to allow for a 72-unit single-family residential subdivision. He then displayed a map of the site and discussed the plans for the development. He noted that new development is located where the existing golf maintenance building is located. The plan includes relocating the maintenance building closer to the rear of the clubhouse parking lot and altering holes 8 and 9 of the golf course to allow for the 72 units. Mr. Thompson emphasized that the additional units did not exceed the allowed number of units approved under the original handbook in 1998. He stated subsequent amendments amended Phase 3 of the project and set the number of allowed units at 2,155. Mr. Thompson stated the Council granted tentative approval of this handbook amendment on October 12, 2009. The final handbook has not changed and staff is recommending final approval of the handbook.


Page 7 of 14

Mr. Thompson stated the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the planned development handbook and throughout the handbook amendment process none of the standards were changed; therefore, staff is recommending approval of the tentative map. Council Member Smith said the map appeared to show that the houses would be built on a slope and asked if they would be two-story homes with a basement. Mr. Thompson stated there were be single and two-story homes toward the front of the development and the homes actually built on the slope will have the option of lower-level walkout basements. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to grant Final Approval of the amendment to the D’Andrea Planned Development Handbook associated with PCN06077 as the final draft is in substantial compliance with the City Council’s action on the Tentative Approval of the amendment to the D’Andrea Planned Development Handbook and the facts supporting these findings as set forth in the staff report.. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve the Tentative Map associated with PCN06077, adopting Findings T1 through T12 and the facts supporting these Findings as set forth in the staff report, subject to the conditions of approval, 1 through 23 as listed in the staff report. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

6.5 First Reading and possible discussion of Bill No. 2614, Floodplain

Management: An ordinance amending Chapter 15.11 of the Sparks Municipal Code by adding provisions relating to administration of flood development permit applications; and providing for other matters properly related thereto (Time: 4:23:17 p.m.)

City Clerk Linda Patterson read Bill No. 2614 by title. Mayor Martini announced that the Public Hearing and Second Reading would be held at the next regular City Council Meeting of December 14, 2009. 7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: None. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items:

8.1 Public Hearing, second reading and possible action on Bill No. 2612, An ordinance by the City of Sparks amending Title 20 of the Sparks Municipal Code to allow for Electric theft deterrent devices with defined criteria in the I (Industrial) zoning district (Time: 4:23:44 p.m.)

Senior Planner Jim Rundle and Building Official Mark Miranda noted that this ordinance will amend Title 20 to allow for electric fences. To date, electric fences have not been permitted in the City of Sparks. However, based on new technology that these electric theft deterrent devices provide, staff now believes that they can work in the city, but that they should only be allowed in the Industrial zoning areas. Mr. Rundle noted that they worked with various departments regarding this amendment and it was determined that there are certain standards that will be incorporated with this code


Page 8 of 14

amendment; however, those standards were not appropriate for inclusion in the zoning code. He stated the Fire Department will review applications for electric fence permits. He said normally the Police Department does not review fence applications, but if an application for an electric fence comes in, the computer will automatically notify the police department of the location of any electric fences. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to comment on this proposed ordinance. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve Bill No. 2612 (Ordinance No. 2432) allowing for electric fences in the Industrial area. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

8.2 Public Hearing, second reading and possible action on Bill No. 2613, An ordinance amending title 15 of the Sparks Municipal Code including but not limited to adopting by reference the IEC section 60335-2-76 Edition 2.1 and providing other matters properly related thereto (Time: 4:28:35 p.m.)

Discussion regarding this item was held in conjunction with Item 8.1. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to comment on this proposed ordinance. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to approve Bill No. 2613 (Ordinance No. 2433) a code amendment to Title 15 associated with electric fences. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

8.3 PCN08012, Public Hearing, review, and possible action on a request from

Red Hawk Land Company and Maverick Development, LLC, for Tentative Approval of an amendment to the Wingfield Springs Planned Development Handbook, to allow the designation of the “outparcel” as Village 30, Golf Cottages, including establishing Village 23 with 20 units, Village 25 with 100 units, Village 27, Phase 3 with 42 units; modifying uses under the Golf Facility to include a wider range of neighborhood servicing retail and commercial uses and modifying Neighborhood Commercial to allow for a wider range of commercial uses, inclusive of minor administrative changes on a site approximately 1,645 acres in size within the NUD (Wingfield Springs Planned Development) zoning district generally located north of the Miramonte Planned Development, east of the Pioneer Meadows Planned Development, and west of the Foothills at Wingfield Spring Planned Development (Time: 4:29:55 p.m.)

Senior Planner Tim Thompson stated this amendment has several components as outlined on page 6 of the Planning Commission staff report. He stated there are four amendments which staff considered to be fairly significant: 1) to designate the out-parcel as golf cottage; 2) to increase the height limitation within the golf cottage land use designation from 40 feet up to 50 feet; 3) to alter the land use table in section 3 of the handbook (looking at what has been built


Page 9 of 14

and what is planned for the future and allocating a certain number of units to some of the villages that are currently under construction or not built yet); 4) to add some additional commercial uses to both the neighborhood commercial land use designation and the golf club facility designation. Mr. Thompson discussed Village 30 located in the out-parcel. It is about 16 to 17 acres and is located directly east of the existing golf club facility, north of the fifth fairway. There is also an old school building on that site. This property was annexed into the City in 2005 and was included in the Wingfield Springs handbook, but there was no development plan and was simply referred to as the “out-parcel” and never given a specific land use designation. This amendment proposed to identify this parcel as Village 30 and place the golf cottage land use designation on that property. Staff is of the opinion that this is an appropriate location for the golf cottage designation, given its proximity to the golf facility. Mr. Thompson stated the amendment also proposed to increase the height limitation within the golf cottage designation from 40 feet up to 50 feet. The analysis shows that in Title 20, if there is a commercial project located directly adjacent to a property that is zoned R-1 (single family) the height to setback ratio is 1/1 (essentially one foot of setback for each foot of building height is required). In this case, there will be about 45 feet from the proposed buildings to the road, plus about 50 feet across Poco Rey Drive for a total of over 90 feet from the proposed buildings to the single-family homes located across Poco Rey Drive. Therefore, staff concluded that this height increase is appropriate and the resort condominium designation already allows a 50 foot height. He then discussed the commercial properties, stating both the golf facility and the neighborhood commercial facility currently allow for commercial uses. Within the neighborhood commercial centers, the following uses are already allowed: retail stores, personal service shops, recreation facilities and fitness centers, public facilities, clinics, amusement and entertainment centers, offices, service stations, restaurants, brew pubs, and child care facilities. The applicant is proposing to add the following uses: carwashes, drive-thru facilities, mini-storage, bank branch offices, dry cleaners, and grocery stores. Mr. Thompson stated these uses are not out of character for a commercially zoned property. Mr. Thompson said that the following uses are allowed within the golf facility designation: retail, restaurants, cafes, food service facilities, bars, taverns, brew pups, recreational facilities, restricted gaming, and convention and meeting spaces. The applicant is proposing to add the following uses: child care facilities, professional medical offices, drive-thru facilities, personal services; dry cleaners, bank branch offices with drive-thru, and grocery store/markets. Staff feels the proposed new uses are appropriate in this commercial district. Mr. Thompson noted that in 1994, when the original Wingfield Springs Development Agreement was adopted, the applicant (through the development agreement process) has the ability to go straight to a final map. There is not tentative map required and no conformance review. Staff is concerned about this, particularly as development progresses to the southern portion of the property and up into the hills. Therefore staff has requested that the applicant include the conformance review process within this handbook; only for those villages located south of Vista Boulevard, on the southern parcel. He stated the conformance review functions like the tentative map process, but with no public hearing required—it is strictly an administrative review.


Page 10 of 14

Mr. Thompson then discussed the changes to the land use table as outlined in the staff report. He noted that Wingfield Springs could potentially have 3,110 units and right now they have built or planned for about 2,600; so there are about 500 additional units they could put in this development. The handbook already gives them the ability to move densities around with this development. Mr. Thompson stated that staff was able to make all the applicable PD findings and they are recommending that the City Council grant tentative approval of this handbook amendment. Council Member Carrigan asked if it was correct that the commercial has to have an out on Vista—access to Vista Boulevard. Mr. Thompson pointed out the only parcel that is identified as neighborhood commercial (as it exists today) and the parcel does have access onto Vista Boulevard. Mr. Tom Whittemore thanked staff for their thorough review of the application and noted that the density of Winfield Springs today is 1.4 dwelling units per acre and this request would take it to 1.56 dwelling units per acre. This is one of the lowest development densities of any master planned community in Sparks and they are still well under the number of units which have been approved. He then discussed various positive aspects of the development which showed that they are well above the minimum standards for development and that Wingfield Springs is one of the highest quality developments in northern Nevada. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to comment on this handbook amendment. Mr. Lou Dauria, President of the Wingfield Springs Homeowners Association asked that the homeowners association be notified before the bonds are released so that they have a say on whether or not everything has been completed, including the common areas. There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed. Community Development Director agreed that there have been occasions where the developer has not completed the common areas of a development; this is why staff has included a performance process in the southern neighborhoods. It will allow staff and the developer to take an incremental approach forward to see that these things get done. Mr. Krutz also noted that bonds are not required for improvements on private property, such as the common areas of a subdivision, so this has not been done in the past. Council Member Carrigan stated that an incremental performance process is a good idea and should enable staff to ensure that the common areas are completed prior to the developer moving on. Council Member Schmitt led a discussion regarding why the City could not require a bond for completion of common areas and who was ultimately responsible for seeing that all the work is completed before the project is considered completed. Council requested that Mr. Dauria’s concerns be put on a future agenda for discussion regarding possible resolution. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to grant Tentative Approval of a request for an amendment to the Wingfield Springs Planned


Page 11 of 14

Development Handbook associated with PCN08012, adopting Findings PD1 through PD21 and the facts supporting those Findings as set forth in the staff report. The Tentative Approval includes that the applicant shall file for final approval of the planned development within one year from the date of the City Council granting tentative approval of the planned development handbook. Due to the nature of the tentative planned development, the City Council does not recommend that a bond be required at this time as stated in NRS 278A.490. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

8.4 Public Hearing, 2nd Reading, discussion and possible action of PCN09018,

Bill No. 2610, an ordinance for a voluntary Annexation request, in accordance with the City of Sparks 7 year Annexation Program, by Tahoe Reno Commercial Center, LLC, for a parcel 30.23 acres in size generally located west of the USA Parkway interchange, east of the Patrick Interchange, shares the southern property line with the right of way of Interstate 80’s west bound lanes and is approximately 10.5 miles east of the intersection of Vista Boulevard and Interstate 80 within the City of Sparks Sphere of Influence. Upon Annexation the zoning would convert from a Washoe County Designation of Industrial to a City of Sparks zoning designation of I (Industrial) (Continued from the November 9, 2009 City Council Meeting) (Time: 5:02:36 p.m.)

Senior Planner Jim Rundle noted that this item was continued several times and is once again before the City Council for consideration. Staff recommended denial of the annexation request to the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission has forwarded a recommendation of denial of the annexation request. Mr. Rundle stated that Council has heard the presentation on this annexation numerous times and he was available to answer any questions they may have. Council Member Carrigan asked why would we take our sphere of influence down the Truckee Canyon if we were not going to do anything. He said he was not in favor of expanding our sphere of influence in this direction, but we did. So now he wants to know why we did. Community Development Director Neil Krutz responded that expanding in this direction is a logical extension of the City limits in the long run (30/50/100 years out). It is also an opportunity to develop a land use plan that will be fiscally positive for the City and help up to continue to broaden the city’s fiscal base in the future. Mr. Krutz emphasized that their recommendation of denial is not because staff is sending a message that we do not want to expand in this direction, but convey a message that the land use plan needs to be completed and adopted and appropriate infrastructure studies and plans need to be in place to support the findings that development is fiscally positive, and that we can maintain infrastructure and serve development in the long run. He stated the recommendation of denial is simply saying that this annexation application is premature because those planning steps have not been completed. Council Member Carrigan said if the annexation is premature, why we asked the applicant to do the annexation. Mr. Krutz explained that in the last legislative session there was a lot of discussion regarding the legislature taking away our ability to do discontiguous annexations. Staff felt that if we could annex an anchor parcel in this area, we could then do contiguous annexations. However, the annexation application process too longer than normal and the legislature did not act to change annexation law, so we still have noncontiguous annexation ability. In the mean time there was another property owner that applied for annexation and


Page 12 of 14

became the “anchor” for that area. Mr. Krutz clarified that yes, we did ask this property owner to annex the property, but in the meantime the circumstances have changed. Mr. Carrigan commented that we asked him to annex his property and now that we no longer need him, it appears that we are turning our backs on him. Mr. Krutz stated that staff continues to work with Mr. Wrobleski and the other major property owners in the area to develop a land use plan that they, as a group, can support; because we want to see that area become a vibrant part of Sparks. Council Member Schmitt asked how much Mr. Wrobleski paid in application fees for the annexation, which was done at the City’s request. Mr. Rundle stated it was $3,000. Mr. Schmitt asked for confirmation that Mr. Wrobleski did submit a land use plan. Mr. Rundle stated there is a draft East Truckee River Canyon Area Plan; however, the property owners, including Mr. Wrobleski, do not approve of the land uses that are reflected on that land use plan and did not want to move forward with that land use plan. Mr. Krutz clarified that the plan was paid for jointly by the City, Mr. Wrobleski, and Washoe County. An outside firm, CFA, was retained by the City to draft the plan. The plan started going through the planning process, but toward the end of that process, the major property owners expressed displeasure about how the plan was laid out and said it would not work for them. Staff then got the group of property owners together and let them know they all had to work in the same direction in order to move this forward. This was a couple of years ago and it wasn’t until very recently staff notices some agreement regarding how the plan will go forward. Council Member Schmitt said that because we asked for the annexation, we need to honor our commitment to Mr. Wrobleski. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to comment on this annexation request. Mr. Krutz noted that yes, the City did ask for the annexation, but Mr. Wrobleski played a role in the change in circumstances after the request was made in that he did not agree with the land use plan and in the time he took to file the complete annexation request with the City so that we could get into the process and carry it forward. Mr. Rundle noted that state law requires that we request a fiscal analysis for an annexation application, but when the application was originally submitted in 2008, the application was deemed incomplete because there was no fiscal analysis. It took some time for Mr. Wrobleski to submit the fiscal analysis and the application period was extended substantially. Council Member Smith stated that although the circumstances have changed, the City’s overall philosophy has not changed—we still want to plan and develop the East Truckee River Canyon. Council Member Ratti stated that while we do have an obligation to the developer because he spent considerable money and time on this annexation request, the City Council also has an obligation to the citizens of Sparks to do property land use planning and move forward with quality development that is fiscally feasible. Council Member Smith stated he did not want to see the area annexed one parcel at a time, but the entire area, with all property owners, annexed at one time. Mr. Krutz stated staff would relay that message to the property owners.


Page 13 of 14

Mayor Martini asked if the annexation was approved, could the developers build something on the property without the City’s permission, since they don’t have a land use plan. Mr. Rundle stated there is an industrial land use zoning designation on the property, so they could request to building anything allowed in that zone; however, they would have to go through the City’s special use permit process to do so. Mayor Martini emphasized that the application and approval process will still need to be followed, regardless of whether or not there is a land use plan in place. Mr. Rundle stated in all likelihood and type of special use permit application would receive a recommendation of denial until a land use and facilities plan is in place. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to comment on this annexation request. Mr. Wrobleski said staff has done a great job in trying to bring this project forward. He then discussed his reasons why he felt that the City should approve his annexation request. There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed. City Attorney Adams noted that a confidential client/attorney session had been held with the council regarding this application. He said he has been listening intently to the testimony tonight and he did not believe that when the developer got this “invitation” to annex his property that this application was being made in lieu of uncertainties surrounding a potential legislative action. He said this is all about land speculation. His guidelines are NRS 268.265 and NRS 268.6255, so based on what was said at the confidential attorney/client session and what he has heard tonight, he is on record as endorsing what staff is recommending. Council Member Ratti said she has faith in staff’s ability to represent the interests of the City as we are going through this process. She said she understands that nothing will happen in this area without the investment of the private community; however, she is troubled about the comments that it is important for the property owners to agree on and that they are investing in the land use plan when it is the City’s job to find a land use plan that is good for the future of the City as a whole. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Schmitt, to approve Bill No. 2610 (Ordinance No. 2431) the Annexation request associated with PCN09018 to annex approximately 30 acres into the City of Sparks based on findings A1 through A4 and the facts surrounding these findings as set forth in the staff report. Council Members Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Council Member Ratti, NO. Council Member Salerno, ABSENT. Motion carried.

9. Comments: 9.1 *From the Council and City Manager (Time: 5:32:42 p.m.) Councilman Ron Smith, asked that item 5.7 from the November 9, 2009, City Council Meeting—Consideration and possible award of the Informal Quote, for the Larkin Circle Improvements Project to Atlas Contractors, in the amount of $84,100—be reconsidered at the December 14, 2009, City Council Meeting.


Page 14 of 14

10. *Adjournment (Time: 5:32:15 p.m.) There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:33 p.m. _______________________________ Mayor __________________________________ City Clerk >>>

Page 1 of 17

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 3:00 P.M. Monday, December 14, 2009 City Council Chambers, Legislative Building, 745 Fourth Street, Sparks, Nevada 1. *Call to OrderThe regular meeting of the Sparks City Council was called to order by Mayor Geno Martini at 3:01 p.m. 2. *Roll Call Mayor Geno Martini, City Clerk Linda Patterson, Council Members Julia Ratti, Phillip Salerno, Ron Smith, Mike Carrigan, Ron Schmitt (via telephone), City Manager Shaun Carey, City Attorney Chet Adams, PRESENT. Staff Present: Brian Allen, Steve Driscoll, Andy Flock, John Martini, Stan Sherer, Armando Ornelas, Tracy Domingues, Shirle Eiting, Neil Krutz, Sally Mols, Rob Joiner, Adam Mayberry, Kathy Clewett, Ron Korman, Chris Syverson, Jeff Cronk, Dave Vill, Joe Grogan. Invocation Speaker: There was no invocation given. Pledge of Allegiance The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Julia Ratti. *Comments from the Public Mr. Rorton Keller, 6800 Ericka Way, Sparks, NV, offered to gift 20 acres of land to the city for a park. Mr. Adams will meet with Mr. Keller to discuss and bring issue back to the Council. Approval of the Agenda Consideration of taking items out of sequence, deleting items and adding items which require action upon a finding that an emergency exists. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Salerno, to approve the agenda with Item 6.11 continued until the January 11, 2010, meeting. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 3. Recommendation to Approve Minutes of: Regular Meeting of November 9, 2009 A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 9, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 4. Announcements, Presentations, Recognition Items and Items of Special Interest:

4.1 Presentation on Reno-Tahoe Airport issues Mr. Joe Mayer, Sparks’ representative on the Reno Tahoe Airport Board of Trustees, introduced his fellow representative, Mr. William Eck, and Chief Operating Officer Ms. Krys Bart, and Mr. Brian Kopen from the Airport. Ms. Bart gave a presentation as outlined below: �

Regular City Council Meeting Minutes for December 14, 2009

Page 2 of 17

��

• ��

o ��

o � ��

• ��

o !"��#��

o $� �� %!&�'''�(��

o !)��* �� #�� +��

o ��,�� -�'''� �� (�� #�

%-"�."'�'''�

o �� /�� 0� �� &� �� (�� * �� #�� ,�

�� (��

• $�* ��1�� (��

o 2��,��

• .'3��#��(��#�� 0��

o 4��

o 5��

o ��

o 6� ��

o $��

• 7�� #�� 0��(��

o 5��(��%!-'�� -'��

o &)'�� #��#��(��

o 4(�� -89��

o �� (��#�� 5��$��:� ��

• � ��

o �,��5��; ��<��

� 4��5��=&8�4��>��

• �$�#��(��#��?� ��9��

• ��#��@��#��$$�� #��-8��

� ��

� ��#��

• �� * �� -�#�� -''�

o A��

� &� �B ��!''C�=�� &� �B ��!''8>�

• �D�)3�$��7�� 2 ��* ��

• �D�83�#�* ��(��

� ��4��,��#��#��

o C.�� (�� (��

• 5�<��/��,��(�� #�<��@��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

4��07��4��0��7$�� &"D�"� D"� !�&."� .�

$�,�� 07��EF� &&.�!� D&� -�)8'� -'�

7��(��G�� G5� ��50� H �� &D"�.� &&� !�)C!� -D�

7�� <� &D&�.� !C� -�C)!� -'�

/�� 4�� &!-�-� &D� !�!)'� -!�

�� #�� H � &!'�'� !8� -�.C&� C�

�� I� &-&�&� !D� -�".C� D�

� � � � �

�� !�� "#�$%� &�� '(%&#� #)�

� � � � �

7�� <2 � &-'�-� -C� -�'!8� )�

� ��$� &'&�&� !&� -�D)&� "�


Page 3 of 17

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� (��2�� &'&�D� !D� -�-!&� .�

��0�� &'&�!� D)� -�&8&� 8�

� �� 02� ��2/�� &'!�D� ")� "�'&.� -)�

� ��(��0��$�� D8.�)� !&� -�-&)� -&�

��* ��(��0/�� I� D8.�!� !"� !�!..� .�

�

• 2�* ��(��

o �� * ��

� ��-'��!'-'�5��J�4 ��,K�5��J�A��(��K��

� � �� !'-'�0�5��J��

o /��@��

� A�� -.��!''C�0�5��J�� K�� $��

o 4��(��1�

� ��

� 4 ��,�

� A��(��

� $��

• �� A��L�

o /�� 4��0�� #�A��

o ��<��

� 2��!''3�

o ��#��1�

� ��D''��D-'�

� �� .&.��.).��.".�

� ��

o 7��$��5� ��

o 52H ��#�� M!C�� 4��* ��M.�

• 7��6��* � �J�<��

o 5��0� ��4 ��A��

� 52H ��1�

� 7�� * �� $��

� 7�� 7��

� �� #��* �� +�� * ��

o �� $��

� � ��A�� N�

• A��A�##��1��D''��

• �.&.0&''�7��1��D�!''� �G ��

• �.&.0&''�� ,��1��"'.��

• 7��O�� ##��1��-�8CD� ��

• ��7��1��%!�.8D�P �%-�&.G ��

• QQ2H ��1��H ��#��

��##�� * ��

• A�(��

o � �� +�� (��

� 2:�6��=��; �� >�

� ��

� 6��(��

� A��7��

� $��(��

� <�R��H ��LL�

• ��(�� * ��


Page 4 of 17

o 5� ��5��

� �� ##��

� � ��#� ��* �� #��

o ��(�� (�� * ��

� -��4��#�� R��<��#��5��0��5��

4��

• 5��A�(��

o /��4��/��

� 6�� D'��!''C�

� ��,��-!)�?��9��0 � ��

� .�"�� (��#��(��

• H � �� A�(��

o ��##��* ��

� � ��* ��* ��* ��,�� !''�#��-'�'''��O��#��

�� ,�� .'�#��* ��

� 4��(��(��(��#�� (��

� ��4��+��

� �� J��!''8�

� 2�* ��* ��#��J�H ��!'-'�

• �� (��

o �� 0��4��+��=��>�

� A�� -"��* �� (��* ��

� 2�* ��$��<��

� �� (��

� 5��(��(��* ��

• 2�* �52H ��

Council Member Ratti noted that the City has recently lost the park in the Conductor Heights neighborhood because it was found to be located on an old cemetery. She asked the Ms. Bart about the possibility of obtaining one of the properties the Airport Authority purchased as part of their noise abatement program. Ms. Bart said the problem is that the property was purchase with NOISE money and they are supposed to get “market value” for the property and it has to be a non-residential use. Ms. Bart said it could be possible for the City to lease or purchase the property, but the money would go back to the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration). She said the Airport Board would have the final word on how the property was used. Council Member Salerno stated that the customs at the airport leave a lot to be desired and he asked if there was a way to improve service in this area. Ms. Bart said the service is based on activity and if they are successful in getting cargo shipped directly from China, then the Federal government would have to increase the staffing in the customs area. The Airport Authority has some long-term and short-term improvements to the facility in their capital improvement program, and improving service is a concern that they are working on.

4.2 Proclamation – Ashlee’s Toy Closet Day Mayor Martini read a proclamation naming December 14, 2009, as Ashlee’s Toy Closet Day in recognition of 10-year-old Ashlee Smith’s efforts to collect books, toys, and clothes for children who have been impacted by disaster. The proclamation was accepted by Ashlee Smith and her family.


Page 5 of 17

4.3 Presentation on Geothermal Resources in Nevada by Ormat Nevada, Inc. Administrative Analyst Kathy Clewett introduced Mr. Paul Thompson, the Director for Policy and Business Development at Ormat Nevada, a leader in geothermal energy generation. Ms. Clewett asked Mr. Thompson to make this presentation on what they do and how they do it, worldwide. Mr. Thompson gave a power point presentation as outlined below: * �+ ��,��-��(�.�$��/��-��+ ��+ ��

H �� 6��

• :�� * ��

o � �� &'��#��

o H �� <��2 F��=H 5�>��

• 6�� (�� * ��+��

o ��,�"''��

o ��,�-�'''�� #��* ��* ��

o /�O��2 �(��-C8&�

• 7��,��

o A�(�� * ��

• !''8��%D&"��

H �� H 5�� 0* ��

• -�'''�� #�A��

�� #��

• ��##��(��

o $�* �� 0�� #�,��

o <��* ��#�� (��

• ��; ��(�� 07��

o 4��+�� #��!'��C83��

o �� * �� @��

o 2��* ��

• � �� #��

o 4��S�"��

o � ��S�!��* G�� =D''#��,�D''#�>�

• 7��4��(��

2 �(�H ��

• H �� -'��* ��* �� &��; ��(�� * G��

• -''�� J��H ��

o D!�� J�54��O��#��

• -''�� J��A�(��

o ��J�54��O��#��

• -"�6�� 4��J�� ,��

• 2�(��1�

o !''�� J��!'--�

B ��

• -''�� J��!''.�

o S�."�'''� �� D''�'''��

o S�%&''�'''�'''��(��

• !''�� J��!'-'�

o S�-D8�."'� �� """�'''��

o S�%8''�'''�'''��(��

��

• -)'�� 2 �(�

o (�� %�)!�.''GF��

• "''��


Page 6 of 17

��

• -�� S�&�� ,��

• H �� R��!''�� S�'�8��A��(�� 2 �(�

• �,��2 �(�S�%�!�")�� G��!''8�

H �� R��(�� <� ��

• H �� R��-''�� #� �� * ��2 �(��1�

o �(�� #�."'�'''��#��H !�

o �(�� -�"�� #��=� ��O��(��#��-''�'''��>�

o �(�� D"'�� #�* �� (�� #�� 0��* ��

��(��4��+��

• �6��A�� 1�

o A��4��<A 0�-&&')�=��1%"�-DD�-!'>�

o ��<A0-8!''�=��1%"�-DD�-!'>�

� ��R�� 0�� R��+�� =��>�* ��

�� #�H �� 6�� ,1�

• A��6��H �� #��2 5�� =#�� (��

�� #�<��5��#��

• A��4��5��#��6<�=#�� 0��

• �� 0��=#�� G� ��

�� >�

• �� H ��#��(��=#�� * �� >�

• 6�� <��=#��* �� >�

• 4�� =#�� #�� >�

• A�� +��#�$* ��2 ��$��=#��

�(��

� A��4��

• 4��

o H �� 0�#��* ��

o 6�� ,0��

�(��

o ��6�0��#�� 0#��

� �� =�2$��J��(��* ��>�

o �6<0�� #��#��

o $�2$0��

o �2$0� ��

o � <�0��6��

o 4��

o ��=�� >�J�� #��

��

o � ��0�� J��6��

��(��4��+��

• �,��1�

o � ��=�� >J�7H ��''''-'C�=��1%-'�"')�.C&>�

o 6��=4�>�J�7H ��''''-'C�=��1%"�.C&�"''>�

o � ��=��>�J�7H ��''''-'C�=��1%"�.C&�"''>�

• $��6��1�

o ��* ��(��J�7H ��''''''"�=��1%-.)�)� >�

��

• H �� (�� * �� * ��2 �(�

• H �� #�� (��(��

• 2�� 2 �(��* ��* �� #��

� �� (�� * �� * ��


Page 7 of 17

5. Consent Items: A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Consent Items 5.1 through 5.13. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


transfers are for the period November 4, 2009, through December 2, 2009 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending approval of the Report of Claims and Bills as outlined.

5.2 Consideration and possible acceptance of the City’s Comprehensive Annual

Financial Report (CAFR) for fiscal year 2008-09 An agenda item from Finance Director Tom Minton recommending the City Council accept the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for fiscal year 2008-09 and approve the report for distribution as outlined in the staff report.

5.3 Consideration and possible approval of a Stream Flow Monitoring

Agreement with the U.S. Geological Survey in the amount not to exceed $44,171.50

An agenda item from Civil Engineer John Martini recommending the City Council approve an agreement with the USGS for stream flow monitoring on the Truckee River at five locations. This monitoring is required by the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection as part of the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facilities’ discharge permit. Historically this data collection has been achieved through cooperation with the USGS, who operates and maintains the monitoring areas. Funds are budgeted for this monitoring and costs will be split between Sparks and Reno.

5.4 Consideration and possible approval to purchase a 2009 Caterpillar 305C-

CR mini excavator from Cashman Equipment in the amount of $63,121 An agenda item from Maintenance Superintendent Ron Korman recommending the City Council approve the purchase of a mini excavator to replace equipment that is 18 years old and will be in need of major repairs in the near future. The City will use a joinder bid provision to obtain the best pricing on this replacement vehicle. Appropriations for this purchase will be provided from fund equity upon completion of an augmentation.

5.5 Consideration and possible approval of the 2010 Interlocal Lease Agreement

with Washoe County School District, Transportation Department An agenda item from Parks and Recreation Director Stan Sherer recommending the City Council approve an agreement to allow the City to use buses from the School District for the transportation of participants in the City’s summer, year-round, and holiday day camps. There is no per/mile fee increase from the current 2009 agreement and the budgeted amount reflects a reduction from the 2009 budgeted amount, due to fewer trips planned for this year. Programs that require transportation by bus are offerd on a cost-covering basis and costs are paid from program revenues.

5.6 Consideration and possible approval to purchase four replacement vehicles


Page 8 of 17

for the Police Department from Champion Chevrolet for a total amount of $117,579.00

An agenda item from Maintenance Superintendent Ron Korman recommending the City Council approve the purchase of replacement vehicles for the Police Department. These vehicles have had their life-cycles extended and maintenance costs are now exceeding the worth of the vehicles. It should be noted that the standard police cruiser, the Ford Crown Victoria, will stop being manufactured with the 2011 model year. One vehicle will be replaced with a Chevrolet Tahoe to test its functionality as a police cruiser. The pricing of these new vehicles comes from the State of Nevada joinder bid, which has historically been the most competitive.

5.7 Consideration and possible approval of an Agreement with Arizona Emergency Products for the equipment and labor to up-fit eight new police vehicles in the amount of $93,556.89

An agenda item from Maintenance Superintendent Ron Korman recommending the City Council approve and agreement with Arizona Emergency Products, which specializes in fitting emergency vehicles with specialized equipment. In the past, city staff has stripped out old police vehicles and reused the components in new vehicles. However, this practice does not allow for keeping up with the current technology now used by patrol officers. This company can provide all of the equipment needed for a new police vehicle, including installation of equipment, warranty, graphics/logo placement on the vehilce and transport of the finished product from their facility in Henderson, Nevada, to our equipment services facility here in Sparks.

5.8 Consideration and possible approval to purchase a 2009 Durapatcher Model

125DJT from Duraco, Inc., in the amount of $55,947 An agenda item from Maintenance Superintendent Ron Korman recommending the City Council approve the purchase of a replacement machine for patching wide cracks and potholes in the streets. This one piece of equipment will replace two older crack sealing machines. The Street Maintenance Department has borrowed a similar machine from Washoe County in the past and has found that it works well. Appropriations will be made for this purchase.

5.9 Consideration and Possible approval of a Reversion to Acreage Map for

property located at 1106 Prater Way, 1146 Prater Way, 1114 G Street, and 711 12th Street for Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, a Utah Corporation Sole

An agenda item from City Surveyor Andy Fuller recommending the City Council approve a request from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in order to eliminate interior lot lines which conflict with an existing building. The church is doing a remodel of their existing building, which was constructed prior to the current building and fire codes. The current codes do not allow construction along existing parcel lines unless proper fire walls and openings are constructed. It is much cheaper to eliminate the parcel lines that it is to build new fire walls in an existing building. The reversion map has been reviewed by staff and has been found to be acceptable.

5.10 Consideration and possible award of Bid #09/10-012, PWP # WA 2010-45, to

Steve C. Hamilton, Inc., for the Provision and Installation of Multiple Photovoltaic Systems with the City of Sparks including funding with non-federal and federal/ARRA funds


Page 9 of 17

An agenda item from the City Engineer Pete Etchart recommending the City Council award the bid for multiple photovoltaic systems with the City of Sparks. This contract provides the cost basis for future photovoltaic system installations. Individual system projects will be brought to the Council separately for consideration. Therefore, this contract has no financial impact, except to set the cost basis for future installations.


for The Elbow Room, located at 2002 Victorian Ave., Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Clinton Hugh Hill

An agenda item from Sparks Police Department recommending the City Council approve an application for a Gaming License for The Elbow Room. The license will provide a $1,320.00 annual fee for eleven multi-denominational, bar-top video poker machines and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.


for Markell Investments, LLC, dba Joe Bob’s Chicken Joint, located at 670 Prater Way, Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Maurice Stanley Martin

An agenda item from Sparks Police Department recommending the City Council approve an application for a Gaming License for Joe Bob’s Chicken Joint. The license will provide a $1,440.00 annual fee for twelve multi-denominational, bar-top slot machines and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.


for Silver State Gaming, Inc. dba 777 Gaming, inc. dbat Silver club Hotel & Casino, located at 1040 Victorian Ave., Sparks, NV, submitted by Mr. Rory L. Bedore

An agenda item from Sparks Police Department recommending the City Council approve an application for a Gaming License for the Silver Club. 777 Gaming is a licensed slot rout vendor that is planning to operate in the Silver Club for eight hours prior to January 1, 2010, in an effort to preserve the unrestricted gaming license that the location currently holds. Mr. Bedore is the owner of 7777 Gaming. The license will provide a $120.00 annual fee for one multi-denominational, upright slot machine and $420 annually for one black jack table game and is contingent upon inspections and approvals from various agencies as stated in the staff report.


6.1 Consideration and possible approval of the proposed City of Sparks’ logo design

Community Relations Manager Adam Mayberry noted that this logo is only one component of the City’s total branding effort and supports the City’s brand direction; however, because the logo gets a lot of attention, the Brand Leadership Team felt it was appropriate to seek the Council’s endorsement of the proposed logo. The Chairman of the Leadership Team, Paul Curtis, reviewed the goals of the team and then introduced Ronele Klinensmith, the Owner of RKPR, who discussed the methods used to test the impact of the logo on the public as below. ��#��2 �* �$� �� 0�2 �(�� C�J�-"��!''C��

• ��

o 5E45�<��D!8��#��(��M&��5��2 �(��8C"'CK�.."�D!D�)DDD�T��


Page 10 of 17

• ��(��6��

o � ��* �� #�� R��

o 5��

o 6��0��#�� #��

• � ��

o H ��(��* ��#�2 �(��C��!''C�

o $��(��-'&�8.-��

o 2� ��R��1�-'!�)'!�

� 2�� * �� (��1�)�''!�

o �� #�� 1�-�)C.��

� 2�� * �� (��1��D'�

o ��#��1�"''�

� 2�� * �� (��1��-!8�

o <�0��(��* �1��&8�

� ��5��

o ��#��#�� 1�!&�

� � ��* �� #��

• ��#��$�(��

o "�8')��(�� o "�"3��o CD�!3�� o �� #��#�UG0�-�!"��o C"3��#��(��

• ��

o �� D�!88��

� ��(��

o �0� ��0��#��

� � �� !�D''�

• ��(��5��

o � ��#�� ##��(��

� �� * ��#�� ##��N��

� F�� !&�"3�

� 2�� .&�-3�

� �� -&3�

� �� (�K��(��1��.D��

o �� ##�� * ��#�� #��* �� 1��

��,�� R��* �� <�� #��

��#��#�� (��#��

��?<�R��/�� /��9�� #�� A��(��

� �� (�N�

� F�� 8'�&3�

� 2�� -C�)3�

� �� (�K��(��1��&88�

• $� ��(��7��#�� #�� * ��(��* ��

�

* �� * �� * ��

�

�

�


Page 11 of 17

�

• <�� #�� (��F�� (��(��* �

� ��

� H ��J�"C�"3�

� H ��J�C�-3�

� H ��J�D-�&3�

• 7��$� ��

o �

��

Council Member Salerno asked if a color had been chosen for the logo or if it would just be black. Mr. Curtis said the logo had to work in black as well as color. The team wanted to make sure the logo itself was satisfactory before exploring color options. The next step will be to prepare a color pallet and obtain additional input from City personnel before narrowing down the color selection. In additional discussion, Mr. Curtis noted that the implementation of the new logo will have to be in increments, due to monetary concerns; although the best way is to roll out the logo and branding effort all at once. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to accept the logo design proposed by the Brand Leadership Team as the City’s official logo. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.2 Consideration and possible approval of Council member Ron Smith’s

request to reconsider Agenda Item 5.7 from the City Council meeting of November 9, 2009, concerning the possible award of the informal quote for the Larkin Circle Improvements Project, to Atlas Contractors, in the amount of $84,100

Council Member Smith noted he requested that this item be reconsidered because he was on the prevailing side of the vote. Council Member Salerno stated he originally supported doing the paving, per the recommendation of staff. However, after speaking with Public Works Director Wayne Seidel, it is his understanding that staff is now recommending we hold off on this project because they feel it can be accomplished in a better manner. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to reconsider Agenda Item 5.7 from the City Council meeting of November 9, 2009. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.3 Consideration and possible award of the Informal Quote, for the Larkin

Circle Improvements Project, to Atlas Contractors, in the amount of $84,100 Public Works Director Wayne Seidel stated that based on the weather and where the City is at in the Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) cycle, staff is recommending that the Council reject all the informal quotes and direct staff to review options and available funding and bring back a recommendation to the Council through the regular CIP cycle.


Page 12 of 17

Council Member Salerno asked if the road could be paved at this time. Mr. Seidel stated that even if the contract was awarded, due to the weather, the contractor would probably not be able to start the project until mid-March at the earliest. Council Member Salerno asked if this project would definitely be on the next CIP list. He said this roadway has been in need of repair for quite some time and now the road is so bad, it has become a priority. Mayor Martini agreed that the roadway was in very poor condition. Mr. Seidel noted that Item 6.6 would augment the CIP fund. Council Member Schmitt stated that one of the issues he had with this request was that the project was not in the CIP as approved by the Council. He asked for clarification as to whether this project had ever been on the CIP list in the past. Mr. Seidel responded that the Larkin Circle Improvement Project had never been on listed on the CIP as a specific project. Staff saw this as an emergency pavement repair project and there were savings available in the CIP preventative maintenance fund, left over from other projects. A motion was made by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Carrigan, to reject all the informal quotes for the Larkin Circle Improvements Project at this time and direct staff to review options and available funding and bring back, possibly, a recommendation to the Council through the regular CIP cycle. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.4 Discussion and possible action on setting federal fiscal year 2011

appropriation project requests and priorities Government Affairs Manager Rob Joiner noted that the Council requested staff to draft a list of projects for potential federal appropriations to be presented to them for discussion and prioritization. He noted that the omnibus spending bill was approved by Congress and it should be signed by the President as presented. The bill contained $1.084 million for the Pyramid Highway Corridor Project and $6.724 million for the Flood Project. At a previous meeting the Council asked that staff to reconsider the Public Safety Training Facility and the Gun Range Improvements requests. Washoe County was pleased to have us carry this request and offered a letter of support. They were also happy to take this back and have us submit a letter of support. The other letter of support from the City to the County was for the Flood Project. Two principals from Red Development were scheduled to present a proposal for a multi-purpose event center, but because of the weather today, their flights were delayed and redirected and they are unable to attend this meeting. Staff is recommending that this presentation be postponed until the January 11th meeting. In addition to the letters of support for the Pyramid Corridor Project and the Flood Project, staff is recommending our requests for appropriations include the Second Phase of our Co-Generation Energy Project at the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility (TMWRF); the Larry Johnson Community Center; the Pyramid Highway Corridor and outer ring Route Early Action Items; and the Sparks Rail Yard Relocation and Economic Development Project. Mr. Joiner noted that these projects are not in a ranked priority yet. Staff is asking that the Council provide


Page 13 of 17

direction on ranking these projects. He said that even though the funding for some of these projects may come from separate sources and may be considered separately, our delegation likes to have the projects submitted with priority rankings. Discussion ensued regarding which projects were higher in priority than others. The consensus of the Council was to leave the priorities as listed in the staff report, minus the events center. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to direct staff to coordinate and support the priorities and amounts for federal funding opportunities with Nevada’s federal delegation, supporting agencies, and contract legislative representatives. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.


Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Government Affairs Analyst Kathy Clewett provided an update on recent ARRA activities, noting that our Public Works recently went to bid on the photovoltaic systems. Because of the way we are doing the bidding we are getting bids much lower than other entities--$4 per watt. The City of Sparks is the leading entity in photovoltaic retrofitting in the area and the other entities are watching to see how it works for us. NDOT is going forward with their transportation projects. They are getting a bigger “bang for their buck” on all of their projects because the bids have been coming in much lower than expected.

6.6 Consideration and possible adoption of Resolution No. 3167, to augment the

2009/2010 Capital Projects budget of the City of Sparks Accounting Manager Debi Hunt noted that this augmentation is being done because they are trying to change the way the City budgets for capital projects. This is the first year that staff is bring the augmentation forward for approval this early because this is the first year the City is budgeting only new money in the CIP. Staff report contains a list of projects that were not finished but that need to be added to the new budget format via an augmentation of the old money that was not previously budgeted. Council Member Carrigan asked where the $6.4 million that is being augmented into the budget came from. Ms. Hunt stated the funds are from projects that were already approved but not yet completed. A lot of capital projects don’t get completed in one fiscal year so in the past staff estimated what portion of an approved project would be completed in the current fiscal year and then budget that amount for that year. Then staff would estimate what portion of a project will be completed in the next fiscal year and budget that amount, etc. until the project was completed. What we are changing is now we will budget the entire project as if it were already completed and if the project is not completed, then staff will come back for an augmentation at the end of the budget year. Council Member Carrigan asked for clarification that all these projects have already been approved and that this resolution is just moving the funding forward for this year. Ms. Hunt responded in the affirmative.


Page 14 of 17

A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Ratti, to adopt Resolution No. 3167, augmenting the 2009/2010 Capital Projects budget of the City of Sparks. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.7 Discussion and possible action regarding the Truckee Meadows Water

Authority Cooperative Agreement (or Joint Powers Agreement) among the City of Sparks, City of Reno and County of Washoe related to integration/consolidation of Washoe County Department of Water Resources water operations into Truckee Meadows Water Authority

Public Works Director Wayne Seidel stated that this is an amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) to facilitate the integration of the Washoe County Department of Water Resources water operations into the Truckee Meadows Water Authority. The County took action on this amendment on November 10th and the City of Reno approved the amendment on November 18th; we are the last agency to take action on this proposed amendment. Mr. Seidel summarized some of the amendments to the agreement as outlined in the staff report and made himself available for questions. Council Member Smith asked for confirmation that if this agreement is approved, the consolidation would not take place for another couple of years. Mr. Seidel stated that the Washoe County Board of Commissioners and the Truckee Meadows Water Authority Board Members met at a joint meeting on December 9th to approve an agreement outlining the consolidation process which should take about 12 to 18 months. A motion was made by Council Member Carrigan, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the changes to the Truckee Meadows Water Authority Cooperative Agreement among the City of Sparks, City of Reno and County of Washoe related to integration/consolidation of Washoe County Department of Water Resources water operations into Truckee Meadows Water Authority. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.8 Consideration and possible approval of a Consultant Services Agreement

with PBS&J for City of Sparks Basin Stormwater Master Planning – Phase II, for a total contact amount not to exceed $550,000

Public Works Director Wayne Seidel noted these consultant services will provide the last phase of our storm water master plan for interior local drainage and will ultimately tie into the larger regional flood project. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approval of a Consultant Services Agreement with PBS&J for City of Sparks Basin Stormwater Master Planning – Phase II, for a total contact amount not to exceed $550,000. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.9 Consideration and possible approval of Resolution No. 3168, Consenting to a

Relinquishment and Land Transfer Agreement for SR-646 (Prater Way) portions along the west side and east side of North McCarran Boulevard totaling approximately 1000 feet

Real Property Agent Dave Vill stated the State of Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) is proposing to relinquish to the City approximately 1,000 feet of Prater Way at the McCarran


Page 15 of 17

Boulevard intersection (State Route 646). This is part of the cooperative agreement that the City entered into with NDOT on August 25, 2008, where NDOT agreed to transfer ownership of portions of seven right-of-ways and highways located in Sparks. This is the fourth property to be transferred. Mr. Vill noted that this transfer will give the City control of the operation and maintenance of this roadway. Upon acceptance by the City, NDOT will record the transfer documents and make a maintenance payment to the City as outlined in the cooperative agreement. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve and authorize the Mayor to sign Resolution No. 3168, a resolution consenting to a Relinquishment and Land Transfer Agreement for SR-646 (Prater Way) as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.10 Consideration and possible approval of Resolution No. 3169, Consenting to a

Relinquishment and Land Transfer Agreement for IR80 (Nugget Avenue frontage road from S. McCarran Boulevard to the easterly termini, approximately 0.487 miles)

Real Property Agent Dave Vill noted this resolution will transfer the Nugget Avenue frontage road (from S. McCarran Boulevard to the easterly terminus at the cul-de-sac by the City’s Denitrification Plant) into the control of the City. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve and authorize the Mayor to sign Resolution No. 3169, a resolution consenting to a Relinquishment and Land Transfer Agreement for IR-80 (Nugget Avenue frontage road) as outlined by staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried.

6.11 Update on Financial Results for the Development Services Enterprise Fund for the Period July 1, 2009 through November 30, 2009, and the status of Transfers from the General Fund

This item was continued to the January 11, 2010 meeting. 6.12 Review and possible direction on the Voluntary Separation Plan 09/10

Human Resources Manager Chris Syverson provided a summary and update of the most recent Voluntary Separation Plan (VSP). She stated there were 44 applications; 39 of which were approved. (Three applications were withdrawn prior to the deadline by the employee; one was denied; and one was determined to be ineligible). She stated that the 39 separations would provide $3.63 million in salary savings in FY 09/10 and $4.33 million in FY 10/11 and subsequent years. Although these fiscal results are very encouraging, we will be loosing 710 years of corporate knowledge and service. This will also bring the City’s vacancy rate to 196 positions or 28% fewer employees than the City had at our highest historical point. Ms. Syverson noted that the restructuring and budgetary considerations as a result of this VSP will be discussed at a retreat scheduled for January 20, 2010. Mayor Martini stated the City’s work force is about 1/3 smaller than it used to be. We have taken the steps we need to, but it is devastating to see people leave that we have counted on for so many years to take care the City.


Page 16 of 17

Council Member Smith asked when these employees will be leaving employment with the City. Ms. Syverson stated two have already left and the others will work with their department heads to determine the actual date. Most will be leaving before January 14, 2010, so if they are retiring, they will be eligible to receive a retirement check for January.

6.13 First Reading of Bill No. 2615, PCN07056, A Voluntary Annexation request

by the Cities of Sparks and Reno for a parcel approximately 258 acres in size. Upon Annexation, the zoning would convert from a Washoe County Designation of Public/Semi Public Facilities to a City of Sparks zoning designation of PF (Public Facility) located at 8500 Clean Water Way (Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility)

City Clerk Linda Patterson read Bill No. 2615, by title. Mayor Martini announced that the Public Hearing and second reading of this bill is scheduled for the January 11, 2010, City Council Meeting.

7. Public Hearings and Action Items Unrelated to Planning and Zoning: 7.1 Public Hearing, consideration and possible approval of the abandonment of a

ten (10) foot by two hundred forty-five (245) foot, portion of road right-of-way originally granted to the City pursuant to Tract Map No. 79, entitled “Second Amended Plat of Newtown Tract, a Subdivision of East Reno” as recorded July 6, 1904

Real Property Agent Dave Vill noted the lots were located at 18th and “F” Streets. The owners of the property are requesting the abandonment to facilitate the construction of a new garage and remodeling of the current residence. He stated both roadways are 70 feet wide, which is far in excess of anything we would need now or in the future, therefore staff is recommending approval of the abandonment. Council Member Salerno asked if there would still be a sidewalk between the streets and the property. Mr. Vill stated there is an existing sidewalk and it will be remain in place, as well as the existing fence. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding this proposed abandonment. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. Council Member Schmitt asked the width of current roadway. Mr. Vill stated that with the abandonment, the road right-of-way will be 60 feet and the actual paved roadway is 35 feet wide. Mr. Schmitt asked if this abandonment had been reviewed by Community Development because it was his understanding that there was some concern regarding the amount of right-of-way in this area. He was told that we were not going to be abandoning right-of-way on a case by case basis and that it needed to be done in larger increments, i.e. an entire street at a time. Mr. Vill stated the problem is the cost; right now the City cannot afford to pay for the engineering required to abandon large areas and therefore, we are only reacting to at this time to requests from individual property owners. Council Member Schmitt asked if it was now our policy to only do abandonments if the individual property owners paid for it. Mr. Vill responded that this was correct. Mr. Schmitt


Page 17 of 17

stated that it would probably be a good idea to get together with Community Development because this is different from what he understood the policy on abandonments to be. A motion was made by Council Member Salerno, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve the abandonment of a portion of 18th Street and “F” Street as outlined by Staff. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 7.2 Public Hearing, Second Reading, and possible action on Bill No. 2614,

Floodplain Management: An ordinance amending chapter 15.11 of the Sparks Municipal Code by adding provisions relating to administration of flood development permit applications; and providing for other matters properly related thereto

Civil Engineer John Martini the amendments to Chapter 15.11 are outlined in the staff report. He stated the changes are being made as a result of a meeting with FEMA and the State Flood Plain Administrator, who requested that our municipal code be changed to more closely match the state procedures and to strengthen our ordinance as to what the Flood Plain Administer should do to prior to issuing a flood plain development permit. Mayor Martini opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak regarding this proposed bill. There being no comment, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Council Member Ratti, seconded by Council Member Smith, to approve Bill No. 2614 (Ordinance No. 2434), an ordinance amending chapter 15.11 of the Sparks Municipal Code by adding provisions relating to administration of flood development permit applications; and providing for other matters properly related thereto. Council Members Ratti, Salerno, Smith, Carrigan, Schmitt, YES. Motion carried. 8. Planning and Zoning Public Hearings and Action Items: None. 9. Comments:

9.1 *From the Council and City Manager City Manager thanked Mr. Vill for his professionalism in his service to the City, stating that Mr. Vill is one of the employees who has taken advantage of the VSP and therefore will be terminating his employment with the City. Mayor Martini noted this was the last Council Meeting for 2009 and wished everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. 10. *Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:07 p.m. ______________________________ Mayor __________________________________

City Clerk >>>