STATE OF NEVADA, ) COUNTY OF ELKO. ) ss. SEPTEMBER 4, 2002

Transcription

1 STATE OF NEVADA, ) COUNTY OF ELKO. ) ss. The Board of Elko County Commissioners meet in regular session on September 4, 2002, at 1:00 p.m., in Room 105, in the Elko County Courthouse, at 571 Idaho Street, Elko, Nevada. There were present: County Commissioners Brad Roberts, Chair Nolan Lloyd Mike Nannini Warren Russell John Ellison County Manager Robert Stokes Deputy District Attorney Kristin McQueary County Clerk Win Smith Deputy County Clerk Marilyn Tipton Chief Financial Officer Cash Minor Planning and Zoning Randy Brown Community Development Dir. Charles Voos Public Works Lynn Forsberg --- The following proceedings were held: Commissioner Roberts called the closed door meeting to order at 1:07 p.m. LABOR NEGOTIATIONS: The Board held a closed labor session with the County s management representative pursuant to NRS to receive an update on the status of labor negotiations. No action may be taken upon a matter raised under this item of the agenda until the matter itself has been specifically included on a successive agenda and identified to be an action item. Chairman Roberts called the regular session to order at 1:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Roberts lead the meeting participants in the Pledge of Allegiance. SEPTEMBER 11, 2001: The Board discussed the events of September 11, 2001 and events which have transpired from that date inclusive of consideration of Resolution , entitled, A RESOLUTION CONDEMNING THE ACTS OF TERRORISM AGAINST THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND RESOLVING TO REMEMBER THE BRAVE ACTS OF HEROISM AND THE ULTIMATE SACRIFICE THAT OCCURRED ON SEPTEMBER 11, PAGE 1

2 2001. MOTION: Commissioner Lloyd moved to adopt Resolution , entitled: A RESOLUTION CONDEMNING THE ACTS OF TERRORISM AGAINST THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND RESOLVING TO REMEMBER THE BRAVE ACTS OF HEROISM AND THE ULTIMATE SACRIFICE THAT OCCURRED ON SEPTEMBER 11, Commissioner Russell seconded the motion. Commissioner Ellison suggested that the flags at the courthouse be lowered to half mask on September 11 th. The Board agreed. Commissioner Ellison asked that Robert Stokes have the flag lowered upon September 11 th to half mask. The motion was passed unanimously. Chairman Roberts read the Resolution into the record. LAMOILLE GROVE PARK: Millie McCarley, a member of the Lamoille Women s Club, reported upon the donation of a sprinkler system and other improvements to the Lamoille Grove Park by Newmont Mine and asked for the Board s approval. Paula Krugerud read the written proposal submitted from Newmont Mining regarding the overview, scope of the project, and recommendation. She noted that the proposal included leveling the park, installing a control shed, installing the 104 sprinkler heads, application of a herbicide and the reseeding of the park. Paula Krugerud submitted a diagram of the sprinkler system for their viewing. She stated that the sprinkler system would be installed at no cost to the county. This system would be high quality with low maintenance. It was recommended that this project be approved immediately so that the construction work could commence this fall and so that the re-seeded areas would be ready for the annual Lamoille County Fair next summer. MOTION: Commissioner Russell moved to approve the proposal. Commissioner Lloyd seconded the motion. Commissioner Russell inquired if they would be utilizing the funding raised for the grove as part of this project and would they be requesting the funding derived from fees from utilization of the park this summer. Millie McCarley stated the funding that the Lamoille Women s Club have currently, they would like to provide food for the volunteers working through this month on this project. The remainder of those funds they would like to apply to the purchase of more tables and a bigger barbecue pit. Millie McCarley suggested that the money received by the County through the user fees should be applied towards the electricity, water, and future maintenance of the sprinklers. The motion was passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF PRECEDING MINUTES: The Board considered approval of the minutes of the preceding meetings held on August 7, 2002: Board of County Commissioners, Montello Town Board; for the meetings held on August 8, 2002: Board of County Commissioners, Board of County Highway PAGE 2

3 Commissioners, and the Elko County Liquor Board and the meetings held on August 21, 2002: Board of County Commissioners, Board of County Highway Commissioners, Jackpot Town Board, and the Jarbidge Town Board. Commissioner Roberts noted that the Board had received corrected pages. The pages were as follows: page 39 for the August 7 th meeting and page 10 on August 8 th. MOTION: Commissioner Lloyd moved to approve the preceding minutes for the meetings held on August 7, 2002: Board of County Commissioners, Montello Town Board; for the meetings held on August 8, 2002: Board of County Commissioners, Board of County Highway Commissioners, and the Elko County Liquor Board and the meetings held on August 21, 2002: Board of County Commissioners, Board of County Highway Commissioners, Jackpot Town Board, and the Jarbidge Town Board with the noted corrections. Commissioner Nannini seconded the motion. Joe Aguirre, Elko County Assessor, stated he would like to clarify a point in the minutes on page 24 of August 7 th. He stated that Penny Forsberg had made the statement that the confusion was when she was trying to get her permit that the Assessor s office had open space on that. Joe Aguirre stated that definition of open space for his purposes was NRS 361A.050 Open Space defined: Open space use means the current employment of land, the preservation of which use would conserve and enhance natural or scenic resources, protect streams, water supplies, maintain natural features, which enhance, control of floods, or preserve sites designated as historic by the office of the Historic Preservation of the Department of Cultural Affairs. Joe Aguirre stated that there was no open space anywhere in Elko County because it had to be approved by this Board and there was never any approved. Joe Aguirre stated he wished that point to be made. The motion was passed unanimously. COMMENTS BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC: No public comments were submitted. CORRESPONDENCE, ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND NOTICES: The Board held a general discussion upon the correspondence, acknowledgments and notices received by the Commission inclusive of assignment of issues to subsequent agendas for Commission action. Commissioner Lloyd noted that the correspondence dated August 20 from the Department of Taxation depicted that the sales tax revenues were down by ten percent. Commissioner Lloyd inquired if someone was going to the Planning for Rural Nevada conference to be held in Winnemucca on October 7-9th. Commissioner Russell stated that county representation was still up in the air. Commissioner Russell stated he could attend one day to see if that was worth it and suggested someone from PLUAC may attend it. Commissioner Lloyd inquired about the changes to the Open Meeting Law. PAGE 3

4 Robert Stokes replied that it would not change the Board s practices. He stated the question addressed when the day started and the question if the meeting was held after 6:30 p.m., was it considered another day. The answer was no the day changed at midnight. He did not believe that it would change anything that they had been doing. Commissioner Lloyd inquired about the letter from Julian Smith dated August 21 st regarding the Marys River Land Exchange and if PLUAC had viewed it. Commissioner Roberts noted they should kept track of possible acquisition of lands by the Southern Lands Act monies. He stated that Commissioner Pete Goicoechea from Eureka comments were correct that it was great for Clark County, provided it did not become an adverse effect upon the other rural counties. Chairman Roberts requested that correspondence be forwarded to PLUAC for comment. Commissioner Lloyd inquired about HR 4840 Sound Science for Endangered Species Act of He suggested that they send a letter of support. Robert Stokes noted it was upon the PLUAC portion of the agenda scheduled later within the meeting. COMMISSIONS, BOARDS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS: Hospital Board - Commissioner Nannini stated the meeting was moved to September 14 th and it would be an all day session to speak with the CEO. Commissioner Lloyd inquired who was on the Radio with Commissioner Nannini. Commissioner Nannini replied it was the new CEO. Recreation Board - Commissioner Ellison no meeting was held this month. Auditorium Authority Board - Commissioner Lloyd stated they had approved going out for a grant for a feasibility study for the events center. Museum Board - Commissioner Roberts stated they had replaced two cooling/heating units and some 20 year old equipment. NACO Board - Commissioner Lloyd noted the next event was in November. ECEDA Board - Commissioners Russell stated on August 23 rd they held a workshop to establish objectives and goals. He and Dr. Paul Kilpatrick was working upon the geothermal potential goals and objectives. Commissioner Roberts noted he had spoken to the congressional delegates about the geothermal development. Commissioner Russell stated he had met with the UNR extension people and they had spoken about a feasibility study for a demonstration geothermal greenhouse. He stated there would be another meeting scheduled at the end of the month to consider funding for that study. California Trails Center Board - Commissioner Lloyd stated there was no board meeting. He noted Senators Reid and Ensign had been in town and presentations were made. Juvenile Committee - Commissioner Nannini stated there was a parking problem. LEPC - Commissioner Ellison stating they were waiting to hold a meeting. There were microphone problems during this period of the meeting. Robert Stokes noted that they would be upgrading the system and the speakers behind the Board would be moved and new equipment would be installed. He stated that some of the equipment had been back ordered. PAGE 4

5 Central Dispatch Administrative Authority - Commissioner Nannini stated everything was fine. Regional Transportation Commission - Commissioners Roberts noted there would not be a meeting held until the first of October. Debt Management Committee - Commissioner Lloyd stated there was no quorum present at the last meeting and they would meet again. Commissioner Lloyd noted the legislature had passed another bill with regards to debt management and Cash Minor would update them upon SB 123. Water Planning - Commissioner Ellison stated there was a meeting scheduled for mid-month. Humboldt River Basin Water Authority - Commissioners Lloyd stated there were no meetings. Elk Advisory Committee - Commissioner Russell he did not have any further information to give to the Board. Jail Construction Committee - Commissioners Nannini noted the project was almost completed. Fair Board - Commissioner Ellison stated they did not have the purse money they had expected. He reported that the best day was Monday which was the day of the local race. Yucca Mountain Project - Commissioner Nannini noted the newspaper articles and the focus placed upon the transportation through the numerous states. Senior Citizens - Commissioner Roberts stated there was nothing new to report. Elko Mental Health Advisory Board - Commissioner Ellison stated there was no report. Nevada Division of Wildlife Liaison - Commissioner Russell stated they would reschedule their September meeting. Nevadaworks - Commissioner Ellison the meeting would be held mid-month in Minden, Nevada. Northeastern Nevada Regional Transit Coalition - Commissioner Ellison started they were writing their new by-laws and they extended the one year contract with the vendor for the NEAT system. USFS Liaison - Commissioner Nannini stated there were no meetings for this month. Robert Stokes stated they had met on the 13 th of August and discussed some of the road issues, and Jarbidge, and the proposed sale of park facility. He stated that a private party was involved. He stated they had that talked about the Harrison Pass issues. BLM Liaison - Commissioner Ellison inquired of County Manager Robert Stokes if he had received a check. Robert Stokes stated he had not and noted there was a proposal with the BLM upon the cattleguard issues on tomorrow s agenda. Robert Stokes reported that the BLM had $5, in their budget for cattleguard services which they would submit to the County. He stated the BLM had provided funding for noxious weeds and they talked about coordinating those efforts and utilizing the funding from the various sources. He noted that PLUAC had requested the County to continue their funding for weed control. PAGE 5

6 Commissioner Ellison noted they had discussed having a meeting at the end of the year to review the funds remaining for weed control. He suggested that Commissioner Russell attend that meeting. Nevada Public Agency Insurance Pool & Public Agency Compensation Trust Board - CFO, Cash Minor, stated there was nothing to report at this time. The next meeting would be held at the same time as the NACO board meeting. ELKO COUNTY DEPUTY SHERIFF S ASSOCIATION: The Board considered approval of a Tentative Agreement between the Elko County Deputy Sheriff s Association and Elko County. MOTION: Commissioner Lloyd moved to approve the tentative agreement between the Elko County Deputy Sheriff s Association and Elko County. Commissioner Russell seconded the motion. Commissioner Nannini thanked all the parties involved and noted it was a three year contract. Commissioner Russell agreed with Commissioner Nannini and thanked everyone and noted that everyone had worked hard. He noted that the Board could now project their budget because they were aware of the amounts involved. Commissioner Roberts noted it was lengthy bargaining and in the end all parties could work with it, the County could budget for it, and the deputies would have an increase over the three year period. The motion was passed unanimously. Chairman Roberts called the Jackpot Town Board to order at 2:05 p.m. The Montello Town Board was called to order at 2:17 p.m. and the regular meeting was reconvened at 3:15 p.m. NEVADA DIVISION OF FORESTRY: Chairman Roberts called a recess at 3:16 p.m. The Board of Commissioners viewed the recently acquired Wildland/Urban Interface Engine that was purchased with County funds. Chairman Roberts called the meeting back to order at 3:35 p.m. ELKO COUNTY CODE: ELKO COUNTY ORDINANCE 2002-I: Pursuant to Notice No and N.R.S ,1, the Board conducted a Public Hearing to consider the possible adoption of Elko County Ordinance 2002-I that amends the membership, meetings and duties of the Wildfire Advisory Board. Chairman Roberts requested public comments. No public comments were submitted. The Board considered the adoption of Elko County Ordinance 2002-I: A N ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 2 TO CHANGE THE MEMBERSHIP AND MEETINGS OF THE WILDFIRE ADVISORY BOARD AND AMENDING TITLE 12, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 3 TO INCREASE THE DUTIES OF THE BOARD, ADDING A NEW TITLE 12, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 5 TO ALLOW VOLUNTEER PAGE 6

7 FIRE DEPARTMENT CHIEFS TO SERVE ON INCIDENT COMMAND TEAMS, AND OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATED THERETO. MOTION: Commissioner Lloyd moved to adopt Elko County Ordinance 2002-I: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 2 TO CHANGE THE MEMBERSHIP AND MEETINGS OF THE WILDFIRE ADVISORY BOARD AND AMENDING TITLE 12, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 3 TO INCREASE THE DUTIES OF THE BOARD, ADDING A NEW TITLE 12, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 5 TO ALLOW VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT CHIEFS TO SERVE ON INCIDENT COMMAND TEAMS as has been read. Commissioner Ellison seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT: Lynn Forsberg reported on an Beowawe library accident which come before the Committee but they referred it to Eureka County. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM: Notification of Notice to Proceed by the Nevada Community Development Block Grant Program for the following CDBG grants: a). Tuscarora Well Power Line - $50,000; b). Jackpot Water Master Plan - $30,000; and c). Midas Cooperative Water Well Engineering - $25,000. Lynn Forsberg noted that the funding was available and they would need RFP s for the water master plan and the Midas water well engineering. Commissioner Ellison inquired about the power line in Tuscarora. Commissioner Roberts noted that it would be addressed later within the meeting. STREET VACATION PUBLIC HEARING: Request for a Street Vacation in Jarbidge, Nevada: Pursuant to Notice No , the Board conducted a Public Hearing to consider the possible vacation of a portion of Bear Street known as 1 North Bear Street in Jarbidge, Nevada as provided in N.R.S If the Board determined that a vacation action, or any portion thereof, shall be approved there shall be the adoption of a resolution and order setting forth the vacation action approved. Chairman Roberts inquired about public comment No public comment. Randy Brown stated he had contact with a surveyor requesting clarification upon this issue. He noted that NRS states that when a street was vacated only half of that right of way was vacated to that adjacent landowner and the other half of the right of way went to the other adjacent property owner. Commissioner Lloyd inquired about the requirement for another map. Randy Brown stated he would like have to an updated map. He stated that he would be going back tomorrow upon that right of way. He stated that if they had PAGE 7

8 to perform the survey it would be costly. He pointed out that the county was giving the property to the landowners to their benefit. Commissioner Lloyd inquired if there was a time limit upon the completion of the updated survey. Randy Brown stated it should be completed within a year. Commissioner Lloyd felt there should be a legal description. Randy Brown stated that he would write the legal description all they had to do was to show that it was a matter of record so it would not become separated. Commissioner Lloyd inquired about the recordation of the information. Randy Brown stated it would be recorded as part of the deed. Ken Holt inquired if they were responsible to record it. Commissioner Roberts replied yes, so it would become a part of your deed. Ken Holt noted that on lot 1, it showed a cut off upon on of the corners. He noted that one-half would go to Jack Creechley and they would get the other half. Ken Holt hoped that it could be written so that corner would be straighten out. Randy Brown stated he would write the legal description after he had contacted the parties. The Board considered the adoption of Resolution No as entitled: A RESOLUTION AND ORDER VACATING 1 NORTH BEAR STREET AND BEAR STREET EAST OF LOT#1 OF BLOCK 29 ON BEAR STREET AND WEST OF LOTS 35, 36 AND 37 OF BLOCK 34 FACING MAIN STREET IN THE TOWN OF JARBIDGE. MOTION: Commissioner Russell moved to adopt Resolution No as entitled: A RESOLUTION AND ORDER VACATING 1 NORTH BEAR STREET AND BEAR STREET EAST OF LOT#1 OF BLOCK 29 ON BEAR STREET AND WEST OF LOTS 35, 36 AND 37 OF BLOCK 34 FACING MAIN STREET IN THE TOWN OF JARBIDGE. Commissioner Lloyd seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES/LAW LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES: David Ellefsen, Library Director, reported that they would be opening the library on Saturdays beginning next Saturday. David Ellefson requested approval to fill a vacant circulation clerk position and a budgeted part-time student library page position. He stated that these positions were within the budget. MOTION: Commissioner Ellison moved to fill the vacant circulation clerk position and a budgeted part-time student library page position. Commissioner Nannini seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. Commissioner Roberts called the Mountain City Town Board to order at 3:47 p.m., and reconvened the regular meeting at 3:51 p.m. TUSCARORA WATER DISTRICT: Lynn Forsberg stated there was water quality/sampling problems and they would resample the water. PAGE 8

9 Lynn Forsberg requested authorization to proceed with a contract with Sierra Pacific for the extension of the electrical service to the water system well site. He stated that Sierra Pacific costs would be $48, for the extension and they would have a $ credit. He stated they had received their Notice to Proceed from the CDBG and would get reimbursement from CDBG. Commissioner Nannini noted this was another ten year project MOTION: Commissioner Russell moved to authorize to proceed with a contract with Sierra Pacific Power Company for extension of electrical service to the Tuscarora water district. Commissioner Lloyd seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. Commissioner Lloyd inquired if they would leave the generator up there for backup. Lynn Forsberg replied that generator would remain there for the backup power and stated that the power line would go within the County easement. Commissioner Nannini noted that when he first was on the Board they were trucking water to the site. Lynn Forsberg discussed the selection of a contract operator for the Tuscarora Water District inclusive of effective date for said services. He stated in June they had an agreement with a contract operator and when the costs changed then they had to solicit proposals. He stated they had received one proposal from Jerry Johnson who was the same person they had a contract with back in June. Lynn Forsberg reported that the operator had requested to have retroactive pay back to July 1, He noted the amount would now be $ per month. Commissioner Ellison inquired if the contract operator costs would come from the water fund. Lynn Forsberg replied that it would come from the Tuscarora water fund. MOTION: Commissioner Lloyd moved to approve the contract with Jerry Johnson with back pay to July 1. Commissioner Nannini seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. Lynn Forsberg noted that Jerry Johnson had been doing that for 22 years. INSECT OUTBREAK DECLARATION: Cash Minor reported they had received invoices from four different groups with regards to the insect infestation outbreaks which requested reimbursement from the Nevada State Emergency Management funding. He stated that on September 9 th and the 20 th there would be a public notice in the Elko Daily Free Press. He would also send it to the Nevada Cattlemen s Association for distribution and to the Federal Land Bank PCA group. He noted the four invoices received to date totaled over $80, Commissioner Lloyd suggested that the invoices be prorated. Commissioners Roberts noted they would have to prorate or go for more funds. Cash Minor stated that if they went for more funds it would be federal funding and there would be restrictions to access that funding. Commissioner Ellison stated that Senator Dean Rhoads had informed him that there was $300,000 in that account and he recommended that they seek an additional $100, for Elko County. He inquired if the Board would like to place that on the agenda to discuss PAGE 9

10 the additional funding. Cash Minor noted September 30 th was the cut off date from the public notices issues. He suggested that they wait to discuss the additional funding until the October 1 st meeting. Commissioner Roberts noted they had hoped to cover two springs with this funding. Cash Minor stated that those invoices included reimbursement of bait for the Department of Agriculture. The Board discussed the allocation of funds. Commissioner Lloyd suggested that they prorate the invoices. Commissioner Ellison suggested they request additional funding. Commissioner Lloyd noted that if they prorate and then receive additional funding they could always go back to give them full reimbursement. PARCEL MAP APPLICATION APPEAL HEARING: Parcel Map Appeal for J & J Lamoille LLC: A parcel of land located in NE1/4, Section 32, T.33N., R.58E., County of Elko, Nevada containing acres - Parcel Map Pursuant to County Code 5-2-9(B), J & J Lamoille LLC appealed the denial of a division of land by the Elko County Division of Planning and Zoning. Pursuant to Notice No , the Commission conducted an appeal hearing regarding the appeal grounds set forth by the appellant. Pursuant to Elko County Code 5-2-9(E), the action of the Board of County Commissioners shall be: The County Commissioners may at the conclusion of the appeal hearing sustain, modify or overrule the action or decision appealed, or may refer the matter, or an portion thereof, back to the Elko County Division of Planning and Zoning for further consideration. The final order of the County Commissioners on an appeal shall be effective forthwith. Commissioner Nannini asked to abstain from the discussion due to his involvement with both parties. Kristin McQueary stated if he had a business relationship and would receive any monies from this, he should abstain. Commissioner Nannini abstained from the discussion and vote. Randy Brown, Planning and Zoning, according to Elko County Code 5-4-4K this fell into the category of a strip lot or a strip parcel. He stated this was a small parcel of land which abuts an existing right of way. He noted that according to code, a strip lot, was a lot of size may not have a strip of land not less that 20 feet in width, connected to a lot with a street, or may be situated within a common area affronted by a street. The area of the strip of land should be excluded in computing the lot, and the length of the strip of land should not exceed 300 feet strip. He stated that these two parcels do exceed that 300 feet strip. However, the lot in question which was 45 acres and the other lot was over 50 acres which were connected to the street by 60 foot strips. Randy Brown stated that in talking with the developer; that if this land was to be further subdivided that 60 foot strip could be offered for dedication at that time. Randy Brown stated he had no problem with that because it would be a long drive way and it would be their responsibility and it was abutting to public right of way. Therefore, he would not have to build the 26 foot width road which would be a road that would lead to no where. He noted the typography of these lots did not lend to further subdivision because it was too steep. Commissioner Ellison inquired if they sell the 45 acre or 50 acre parcels did they have access. Randy Brown stated they would have PAGE 10

11 access to a public right of way. He stated that their major concern was to make sure that all parcels have access to a public right of way. He noted that they would not restrict it; this became part of their drive way. He displayed the configuration of the lots upon a map. He stated that if they wished to further subdivide these, they could dedicate a driveway for access. He noted there was an agreement several years back with the original subdivider. Randy Brown stated that within the agreement they were to provide a fund to develop a road on Mountain View Drive. He stated that the fund needed to be paid into for those three parcels and he had told the developer that. Randy Brown reported that the developer stated he would pay for those two parcels but would argue upon the 3 rd parcel. Randy Brown stated he would argue with him about that and if it was not resolved it would be back before the Board. Kristin McQueary noted because of recent events, staff as well as County Commission via memos from the DA office have been instructed to enforce County Code as written. She stated that if they do make an exception, then she requested that within their motion make factual findings on the record to support any findings to allow this to go forward. Randy Brown noted for factual findings that this was a very restrictive ordinance, and he had been coordinating with several land surveyors and engineers to reword this strip lot or strip parcel ordinance. He noted they have several strip parcels. He needed to allow for this kind of development because there were restrictions with the typography. He questioned whether they wanted a road that went nowhere. He noted that the developers could take a situation like this and have a 1400 foot long driveway and they still could maintain the minimum parcel size of 40 acres. He felt that they should be allowed to do that. Commissioner Russell noted that it would still be private property. Randy Brown agreed that it would. Commissioner Russell inquired if it was part of real estate regulations to disclose to prospective buyers that the County would not maintain a particular road. Randy Brown replied that would come out through the title search portion, and they would inform them of access to the property. Commissioner Ellison inquired about the driveway. Randy Brown stated that the title companies want to know was if they have public access. Commissioner Russell inquired if the potential buyer was informed. Randy Brown replied yes, they would be informed by the parcel map and the deed. Commissioner Russell noted that people had come in and stated they were not told the County would not maintain the road. Randy Brown stated that would be an act of disclosure and noted most people were concerned with legal access. Jim Winer, Caldwell Banker, stated this property and Mr. Rockwell s property was part of an association and that was part of the record. Jim Winer stated that they know there was a fee to be paid for snow removal, etc. He stated this parcel was part of the association and it was within the deed and records. Commissioner Russell inquired of Jim Winer if he made it a practice to let people know when a road was accepted but without maintenance, outside of this property. Jim Winer replied that not every property within the County was always of public record of who maintains what. Commissioner Russell clarified that there was no requirement for the realtor to disclose that. Jim Winer stated that there was mandatory disclosure statements with regards to residential property. He reported that commercial property, industrial property, and vacant PAGE 11

12 parcels don t have a State mandatory property disclosure form at this time. Commissioner Russell inquired if the road maintenance was included upon the form. Jim Winer replied that it was upon the residential parcels. He reported that it was a State of Nevada disclosure which was four pages long. Commissioner Russell inquired if he thought the realtor would object to a disclosure that stated even though this road was accepted for public right of way, it would not be maintained by the County. Jim Winer urged them to speak with their State policy makers to ask for that to be entered into law. He stated that the disclosures protected everyone, the buyers, sellers, etc. Randy Brown noted that was in effect already. He stated that the County disclaimer upon the parcel map stated the County accepted it for dedication but not for maintenance purposes. He stated that they could not address the CC&R but they do put the disclaimer upon all original maps as long as he could remember. Commissioner Roberts stated he had asked Charles Voos to research the creation of associations upon any new subdivisions. Randy Brown stated they encouraged CC&Rs but the County as a government entity could not place that restriction on the property due to the takings issues. Jan Rockwell noted he owned 150 acres and because of the typography with the creek and hill that was why that strip was that way. Otherwise, it would not be of any use, and that was why they went for the 60 foot right of way. Chairman Roberts inquired if anyone wished to speak in opposition of this. He requested that it be noted for the record no one came forward to speak in opposition. Randy Brown recommended that they overturn his decision. MOTION: Commissioner Lloyd moved to overturn the decision of the Planning and Zoning to deny this based upon the facts that the Elko County Code 5-4-4K was a very restrictive ordinance to allow in a situation where the typography does not allow for roads and so forth and if the contractor; based upon the contractor s willingness to grant the public right-of-way/access and he was willing to do that; with the caveat that Planning and Zoning would address this and make it less restrictive based upon those facts he would make a motion to overturn the Planning and Zoning decision. Commissioner Russell seconded the motion. Commissioner Ellison inquired about the private property access. Commissioner Lloyd stated they were approving the parcel map where the 60 foot easement would be included. Commissioners Lloyd, Russell, Ellison and Roberts voted aye. Commissioner Nannini abstained The motion was passed by majority vote. ELKO COUNTY PUBLIC LAND USE ADVISORY COMMISSION: Randy Brown reported upon the Advisory Commission activities relating to the recent meeting. He stated that they had reviewed several letters and noted Fred Zaga was not present to sign the letters. He reported that they discussed the ESA 1973, and the HR PAGE 12

13 4840 Sound Science. He reported that PLUAC supported the HR Commissioner Roberts believed the Board had submitted a letter of support upon the HR 4840 Sound Science for the Endangered Species Act of Randy Brown noted they would send a letter requesting that the Board continued to fund the noxious weed program. Commissioner Roberts stated they had budgeted for the continued noxious weed control. Commissioner Ellison inquired if Fred Zaga would attend the conference in Carson City. Randy Brown believed that Bob St. Louis would attend that meeting. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND COUNTY STAFF COMMENTS: Randy Brown Director of Planning and Zoning stated they were re-writing the County Codes. He noted that every time they have an appeal it cost $ to perform the research, and supply the informational packets to the Commissioners. He stated that Commissioner Nannini had suggested implementation of appeal fee to cover the costs. If the appeal was granted, then that appeal fee could be reimbursed. However, if the appeal was denied then it could be placed in the general fund. He noted that they had limited manpower to perform this research. Commissioner Ellison inquired if that Statewide appeal fee was $ for the appeals. Randy Brown replied that was the State fee and in Clark County that amount could be as high as $ Randy Brown stated that he did not deny anyone the right to appeal but some of these appeals were frivolous because the people did not understand what was going on. He felt that if they had appeal fees then the people may perform their research before they file an appeal. Commissioner Russell suggested that he bring some documentation showing the costs for the last three appeals so they may have some hard facts so that the Board may confirm the direction he was going. Commissioner Lloyd inquired if it could be created by an Ordinance. Randy Brown replied yes. He noted that there was a lot of boundary line adjustments being performed which, by that method allowed the people to change the configuration of the parcels. He stated that the State statute required that the County do map checks to verify that the properties were correct before the County could accept them. He noted that took four or five hours of staff time and field time to verify that. He believed that it cost the County approximately $ for each verification. He reported that the other counties were charging these fees now. Commissioner Roberts inquired about verification by a land surveyor. Randy Brown stated that they were but they required the Counties to verify that they were correct. Commissioner Russell inquired if that could be privatized and have the people pay the private contractors. Randy Brown noted according to statue the County surveyor must sign it off. He stated if they contracted it out it would be costly for the developer. He noted that these services had been performed in the past without reimbursement but these were unfunded mandates. Commissioner Russell suggested an average cost be submitted to the Board so they had hard facts to support their decision. He believed that the fees was a good idea. Commissioner Roberts inquired if appellants could complain about the Board ruling against them so the County would not have to refund the fees. Kristin McQueary stated PAGE 13

14 if they tied their fees to the costs of processing, then it was defensible. She suggested that Randy Brown get her samples of how the fees structure was established by the other counties for her review. She questioned the Board granting a refund depending upon who won because the costs would still be there to bring the appeal forward. Commissioner Roberts suggested a 50% refund to the appellant if the appeal was granted. Chairman Roberts called a two minute recess at 3:58 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 4:30 p.m. PARCEL MAP APPLICATION APPEAL HEARING: Parcel Map for Malcom F. & Gerlinde Wittig: A parcel of land located in Section 3, T.36N., R.62E., County of Elko, Nevada containing acres - Parcel Map Pursuant to County Code 5-2-9(B), Martha P. Hoots opposed the approval of the proposed parcel map. Pursuant to Notice No , the Board conducted an appeal hearing regarding the appeal grounds set forth by appellant. Pursuant to Elko County Code 5-2-9(E), the action of the Board of County Commissioners shall be: The County Commissioners may at the conclusion of the appeal hearing sustain, modify or overrule the action or decision appealed, or may refer the matter, or an portion thereof, back to the Elko County Division of Planning and Zoning for further consideration. The final order of the County Commissioners on an appeal shall be effective forthwith. Randy Brown, Director of Planning and Zoning noted the parcel map showed a total acreage of 645 acres. There were four proposed parcels. He pointed out upon the parcel map the proposed road under construction and Highway 93. Randy Brown stated that the parcel map was approved pursuant to NRS 278 and Elko County Code. He stated that the road was being developed to a 26 foot gravel standard. Commissioner Ellison inquired if this was based upon the same decision as the last one. Randy Brown replied no, this was actually a public road. He stated that this road was to be offered for public dedication and would provide access to the parcels. Randy Brown stated that the lower portion may be 10 to 12 (40 acre) tracts. Martha P. Hoots inquired if they had received a copy of her letter. She noted that it was an agricultural area and there was no necessity for a situation like this within an agricultural area. Commissioner Lloyd inquired about the location. Commissioner Nannini noted that the road was put in and there was construction on some of the lots. He noted it was upon the highway south towards Ely and close to the Clover Valley turnoff. Martha Hoots noted there was similar development seven miles North of I-80; and five miles off towards Metropolis there were houses. Commissioner Nannini stated the only way to stop anything like that was to purchase the property. He noted that these people owned the property and were entitled to do what they wanted to do with their property. Martha Hoots stated that these people would infringe upon the neighbors. She noted the reason they could pay an ex-ordinate price for the property was because they plan to subdivide it to make the payments upon it. She stated that Wells was already depressed and did not need any more homes. Commissioner Nannini noted they would go to Wells to purchase PAGE 14

15 their goods so he did not believe Wells would object. He stated that the Board could not stop the people from purchasing the property and doing that legally to their property. He noted that the land was sold. Martha Hoots inquired why the Board was approving the subdivisions and noted what had happened across from Deeth where there were trailer houses. Commissioner Nannini stated that they had purchased the property and noted that she could have purchased the property. Martha Hoots stated she could not afford to purchase the property for ½ million and run cows upon it. She did not believe that Wells needed more housing. Commissioner Lloyd stated they could not deny it based upon the housing; that was not the issue. Martha Hoots noted they were taking property from agricultural and making a slum out of it. She inquired if he was following zoning requirements. Commissioner Lloyd noted they would have to meet the zoning requirements. Martha Hoots inquired if they were meeting the requirements. Martha Hoots stated they were taking ground that was producing something. Commissioner Lloyd noted that the Board could be sued for taking if they denied it. Martha Hoots stated that the Planning Commission was to prevent this from happening. Commissioner Nannini stated if he had broke the law they could stop it, but if he obeyed the codes, they could not stop him. He noted that the owner could do legally what he wanted to do with his property. Martha Hoots suggested that they not okay the smaller parcels. Commissioner Nannini noted that the Deeth thing happened in the 60's and they learned from those land scam deals. He stated that this issue fitted within the new laws. He stated it did not break any laws. Commissioner Ellison noted it fell within the free enterprise. He noted that if they go within the depressed area and put in a large subdivision and go broke then that was up to him. Martha Hoots noted that the area was not fenced, and inquired if they would make him fence it. Commissioner Nannini stated that they had an Open Range Law and if they don t fence it, the cows would be on their lawns. He stated that the owner purchased the property and he wanted to bring his wife, son and in-laws to live there. Martha Hoots objected to the ten acre parcels. Commissioner Lloyd stated that they had to address the parcel map what was before them presently. Commissioner Russell inquired what her interest was in the property. Martha Hoots stated she had an adjacent 40 acre parcel, and she leased the adjacent BLM property. She noted that if the people go to 10 acre parcels then it would not be viable for the livestock operation. Commissioner Roberts noted they were currently dealing with 40 acres and larger. Commissioner Nannini stated that they had to deal with what was before them now. He noted that if the owner went to 10 acres then she would have to come to them. He stated they had to obey the law. Commissioner Russell noted that if they do not have a legitimate basis to deny this, then they would be involved in a lawsuit. He stated that would cost the county. Commissioner Nannini noted that the board addressed issues everyday to protect the livestock industry. Martha Hoots noted that originally they had requested 10 acre parcels and inquired if he had withdrawn that. Commissioner Roberts requested clarification from Randy Brown. Randy Brown stated that the smallest parcel was 40 acres. He noted there would be a proposed tentative subdivision map with parcel sizes between 20 to 25 acres. He stated that would have to go through the Planning Commission process with a tentative map and that map PAGE 15

16 would have to be approved by this County board. He stated then the final plat would have to be approved by the Planning Commission and this Board. Randy Brown stated it would have to meet all the state, local and federal requirements. He stated that when an owner buys property; he has the right to subdivide. Commissioner Lloyd stated that was not the issue here. Randy Brown noted that the smallest parcel on this map was 40 acres. Commissioner Nannini stated that there was not a demand for that type of subdivision in the Wells area. He stated that if he decided to do that; it was his business and the Board would have to address it at that time. He stated that at that point there may be some questions as to whether there was a demand for that type of facility in that area. He noted that presently he wished to subdivide for him and his family. Commissioner Roberts noted that the Board was limited to the things they could reject to when a private property owner invested his money in the property. He stated they had to abide by State and Federal laws. He noted that the U.S. Supreme Court had historically ruled in favor of property owner. Commissioner Nannini reported that they had built a nice graveled road by a construction company. Commissioner Roberts noted it was a personal financial risk, and the Board could not make the determination that the community did not need it. Martha Hoots inquired if that would be the determination if they applied for the 10 acre parcels. Commissioner Roberts stated if and when he came back with 10 acre subdivision and wanted to complete the loop; he would have to go through another process with more stringent subdivision restrictions. Martha Hoots inquired about water requirements. Commissioner Lloyd noted that was a State issue and they would have to drill wells for each lot. He stated they would have to drill domestic wells. Commissioner Roberts noted they could drill domestic wells upon 10 acre lots. He would have to go through the State water permitting process. Martha Hoots inquired if there were requirements for the subdivider to provide water to a 10 acre subdivision. She received several negative responses from the Board members. Commissioner Lloyd noted anyone in the State with a parcel could drill a domestic well. Commissioner Roberts noted if he subdivided to 10 acre parcels and she had an agricultural well close to that area and each apply for a domestic well; then she could argue that would hurt her well. Martha Hoots inquired if the County had laws to prevent that. Commissioner Lloyd noted it was a State law. He stated that the owner may apply for a community well, and put in a community system but the costs were expensive. Commissioner Roberts noted it was also a means of a marketing tool when they had municipal well or community well. He stated that would require a greater investment. Commissioner Lloyd noted that the County Commission had no control over the water. Commissioner Nannini noted McCullough tried to create another process and stated that the valley folks had problems with that. Randy Brown noted that if they have a 1/4 acre or less they have to have septic or well. Randy Brown stated that anything under an acre they had to have one or other according to State law. He stated for 640 lots they could have a domestic well with 1800 gallons per day. He stated they took into consideration a subdivision of that statute would go before the State Division of Water Resources for approval and they would considered how it would affect an existing well and PAGE 16

17 water rights. He stated they would consider water rights. He noted that 16 units in that section would not impact a water right. Robert Wines, representing the property owners, noted the property was five miles south of the City of Wells boundaries. He pointed out the location of the property in relation to the property owned by the Nevada Land and Resources, the property owned by a ranching organization and the property owned by Ms. Hoots. He noted on the western boundary there was US 93, to the North was private ground and on the south it was onequarter privately owned. He noted Ms. Hoots could access through her property to the federal property on the east. He stated the Nevada Land and Resources had reserved a 60 foot easement along the southern boundary of the property to access Section 2. He stated they had acquired 161 acre feet of water through water rights. Robert Wines stated that when the Wittigs acquired the property, they acquired the interest in the lease with Peavy Ranching which would expire December 31, He stated that in early August of 2002 they noticed Mr. Marvel representing Ms. Hoots that they would terminate lease December He stated no farm use was going on Mrs. Hoots property. He believed that the animals could go around the boundaries of these properties just as easy as going down the middle of it. He did not believe that the parcel map would interfere with the cattle grazing but putting up a fence whether it was subdivided or not would interfere with it. Robert Wines did not believe that County staff would not perform their job or that any development would not comply with County Codes. He stated that Mr. Wittig was placing in a garage in the area presently. He stated that the road was to his house and would serve the parcels created by this map. He stated that Mr. Wittig owned the property and he could build one residence upon that property. MOTION: Commissioner Lloyd moved to sustain, the decision of Planning and Zoning to approve this parcel map. Commissioner Ellison seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. MOTION: Commissioner Nannini moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Ellison seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned until September 5, ATTEST: MARILYN TIPTON, Deputy Clerk APPROVED, BRAD ROBERTS, Chairman PAGE 17