By Nicole Barde

You can find the Agenda HERE and County Manager Pat Whitten’s summary HERE. If you want to listen to the meeting you can access the recording HERE.

Although the meeting went until noon several items had to be pushed out to the next meeting or moved up to the front of this meeting in order to accommodate Commissioners Gilman and McGuffey’s prior commitments.

Item #10. The resignation of the Public Works Director, was accepted with a $5000 settlement in exchange for a release of liability from the Public Works Director to the County. Recall that he had been put on administrative leave in July 2017 in order to allow the county to investigate a harassment claim against him. It took a long time for them to do this investigation. He resigned in lieu of being terminated.

Item # 9. Next up was a discussion of some new guidelines that the county would need to adopt in order for the effluent pipeline to secure funding to get built. Commissioner Lance Gilman recused himself. Commissioner Jack McGuffey said he didn’t know why he would recuse himself since these were just guidelines covering the entire county and didn’t feel that it was necessary. Deputy DA Loomis reminded Jack that in an abundance of caution since Lance is a TRI owner that recusing himself is prudent.

Recall that funding for the pipeline was supposed to come from the selling of a Bond backed by the state and the county and paid for by the taxes within a specific section of TRI. In the end this wasn’t seen as viable either because the structure of the bond didn’t meet the states requirement under SB1 AND/OR it was determined that the taxes generated out of that section in TRI couldn’t cover the bond payments. Either way, I am happy that our needed tax revenues will not be diverted to pay for a developer expense. Those companies need that water and I support them getting it but there are other ways to finance it…..using our tax revenues is not one of those ways.

Pat Whitten explained that since the original bond didn’t qualify under SB1 that the establishment of a ‘Special Improvement District” can be done and that these guidelines are put into place in the event that a district is established. He stressed that the property tax owner is the one who would request/develop a special assessment/improvement district.

The new guidelines also speak of a bond. I was told that the bond will not be a liability to the county nor will the county pay any part of its burden and yet some of this language reads like the county does have a role to play in that regard. The guideline is being put into place to prepare for the potential that TRI will be restructuring its financing for the needed pipeline and that it would need the county’s approval to do so.

My thanks to Austin Osborn, Planning Manager for the following summary.

The net-net of this guideline is:

  • Only publicly owned infrastructure projects allowable under NRS 271 can be financed
  • Assessment cannot exceed the amount of the benefit received by the parcel from the completion of the project or the parcel’s market value
  • Appraised value of a parcel must be at least 3.5 times the assessment levied on that parcel
  • Security for the bonds will be the levied assessments and a debt service reserve fund
  • The County will not use its general obligation pledge to back the bonds
  • Additional security may be required
  • Bond term will not exceed 20 years
  • Initial county costs for review of application and formation of district will be paid for by the developer through a deposit which can later be reimbursed by bond proceeds
  • The County may waive various provisions if it deems necessary and beneficial to the project

After the pipeline is built it would be reconveyed to the TRI GID. A GID is a public entity. During public comment I asked if this was limited specifically to TRI and was told that it could also apply to VC proper should that need arise. You can read the detail of the guidelines in the agenda packet.

Item #8 .Next up was a presentation to describe the interlocal agreement between Storey County and Carson City for the maintenance of Storey County’s first actual traffic signal at TRI. You can review the presentation in the agenda packet.

The Staff summaries are pretty much covered in Pat Whitten’s Summary with the following exception.

County Comptroller Hugh Gallagher reminded the Commission that we have until February 20th to change our tax rates up or down. He said that he has been looking very hard at the many ways that the county could do something about returning some property tax benefit (as a result of TRI) to residents but has not been able to find a way.

SIDENOTE- Recall that Commissioner, brothel owner, and TRI principle Lance Gilman’s 2014 Christmas proclamation on the sharing of TRI’s abundance of riches with the residents? Well, there are no immediate riches to be shared. TRI is eating much of the revenue it produces in county services (expenses) and the need for two more fire stations. So the promised property tax rebate/rollback as a way to share those riches is still not happening. No one did any kind of forward looking projections on expenses and revenues to figure out if we can even survive the abatement period. At this point I wish that they would just come forward and say that it’s not going to happen. That they miscalculated the riches and that Lance was premature in making that statement. THAT would be the right thing to do…….stringing us out is NOT the right thing to do.

But I digress.

Pat Whitten reported that Blockchains LLC had purchased the last of TRI’s available property and what a significant event that was.

During Board Comment Commissioner Jack McGuffey reported that he and the Senior Center and Community Chest were given a tour of one of the companies at TRI who produces and sells natural organic food. They were treated to samples but more importantly they were told that the company would be donating PALLETS of food to both organizations for distribution within our community.

Commissioner Gilman talked a bit about the significant changes happening out at TRI. You can read about it HERE.

Next up was item #12 which was about making changes to the existing County Code which would apply the transient lodging tax to include “extended stay” hotels and determining if there was a business impact. The county sent out the proposed changes to all of the hotel, motel and B&B owners in the county to determine if there would be an adverse business impact and received only two responses.

The genesis for this is that the TRI hotel and motel properties are being used as temporary lodging due to the housing crunch. The “stays” are exceeding the limits of what is considered lodging….it borders on housing and TRI isn’t zoned for housing.  Additionally, the county, and VCTC in particular is missing out on revenues from this practice to the tune of $300k. The language was changed so that the “stay” must be under 30 days in order for it to not be considered as housing…that means if you are staying there for 3 months you will need to move out of your room on day 29 and re-register in another room for the next 29 days. This is how it generates more revenue.

Next up was a review of 6 different Zoning ordinances and amendments. During Public comment Sam Toll, editor of The Storey Teller, asked if any of these changes were going to affect or grandfather existing zoning classifications and was told no.

At the end of the agenda during Public Comment Sam Toll, Editor of The Storey Teller got up to read his public apology to Scott Jolcover. It is the same as he had posted in the Teller HERE.

If you have tender eyes stop reading now. No. Really….avert your gaze.



And for today’s comic relief we have the following:

SIDENOTE-I actually review the packet before the meetings. Sometimes I just skim it because it’s very long at times. As I was skimming this one something leaped out at me…or is it leapt? The particular section is at the end of this article.

So, I got up to ask why bestiality and the distribution of materials pertaining to it was allowable under the ordinance containing “Adult Merchandising “since the Federal Government and Nevada made it illegal and a crime. I was told that it would be looked at and that no county ordinance supersedes State or Federal law therefore it was NOT allowable in Storey County. Glad to hear it….

SIDENOTE- For those with inquiring minds there are 6 places in the US where it is still legal:  Wyoming, New Mexico, Kentucky, West Virginia, Hawaii and …………………….Washington DC!

………………….and now we know.

Ordinance language:

Adult Merchandise Retail Use.  The term “ Adult Merchandise Retail Use” refers to retail establishments furnishing adult material for display, sale, lease, or rental. Adult material includes but is not limited to books, merchandise, periodicals, video tapes, video disks (including DVDs and other recorded video devices), computer disks, instruments, devices, or any other paraphernalia depicting, describing, or otherwise relating to “specific sexual activities” and “specific anatomical areas”.

A. For the purpose of this chapter “specific anatomical areas” includes exposed human genitals, the pubic region, buttocks, and female breasts below a point immediately above the areola

B. For purposes of this chapter, “specific sexual activities” includes any form of actual or simulated sexual intercourse, copulation, bestiality, sadism, masochism, and fondling or touching of “ specific anatomical areas”



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *