Elko County Board of Commissioners Commissioners Sheri Eklund-Brown John Ellison Charlie Myers Mike Nannini Warren Russell Elko County Manager Robert K. Stokes STATE OF NEVADA, ) COUNTY OF ELKO. ) ss. OCTOBER 17, 2007

The Board of Elko County Commissioners met on Wednesday, October 17, 2007, at 1:00 p.m., in Room 105 of the Elko County Courthouse at 571 Idaho Street, Elko, Nevada. There were present: County Commissioners John Ellison, Chair Mike Nannini Charlie Myers Sheri Eklund-Brown Warren Russell Elko Co. Manager Robert Stokes CFO/Ast. Mgr. Cash Minor Deputy District Attorney Kristin McQueary Deputy County Clerk Marilyn Tipton Sheriff Dale Lotspeich Sheriff’s Dept. Lt. Doug Gaily Road Supervisor Otis Tipton Library Director Jeanette Hammons DA Office Manager Liz Watson DA Office/Child Support Carolyn Smith Juvenile Michael Pedersen Public Works Director Lynn Forsberg - - - The proceedings were as follows: CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Ellison called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 1 Commissioner Eklund-Brown led the meeting participants in the Pledge of Allegiance.

I. COMMENTS BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC: Commissioner Ellison noted that Laura Oki was named the State Librarian of the Year. Commissioners Ellison and Nannini presented a plaque of appreciation to Laura Oki. Laura Oki commented that it was not usually given to a non degreed Librarian.

GUESTS IN ATTENDANCE: Commissioner Ellison noted that Dale and Audrey White were in attendance. Dale White stated that he was in attendance after hearing John Ellison’s plea on the radio for public input on the gas tax issue.

II. ACCESS AIR AMBULANCE, INC: Discussion and consideration of a request to renew the franchise agreement with Access Air Ambulance, Inc., that provides emergency medical transport services in Elko County and all other matters related thereto. Commissioner Nannini stated there had been a meeting and reviewed the proposal agreed upon. Access Air would pay $14,000 this year and issue $15,000 worth of membership cards for all the County employees in the total of $29,000 for resolution of the franchise frees. Commissioner Nannini stated the County employees would have membership cards as long as Jim Hutchings had the franchise with Elko County. Commissioner Myers stated this would save the County money in insurance and save the taxpayers so he supported the proposal. He noted this was a viable entity to the County. Travis Gerber stated Access Air would continue to provide a viable service and this would provide for more buy-in from the County. Kristin McQueary stated the motion should include the finalizing of the language in the Agreement. She stated this could be perceived as a potential benefit to the County employees and they should notify the employee associations that this was coming. MOTION: Commissioner Nannini moved to renew the Franchise Agreement with Access Air providing the County attorney and the Access Air attorney gets the wording to meet their specifications and satisfies everybody; $14,000 would be paid on the franchise fees plus the $50 membership cards would be issued to the County employees to satisfy the past balance of the franchise fees and the franchise fees would be $50 membership fee for all County employees every year

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 2 until they end the franchise. Commissioner Eklund-Brown seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.

III. NEW COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING PROJECT: Discussion and consideration of the presentation of the final design of the new office building by the architectural firm of Lombard-Conrad, LLC and all other matters related, thereto. Nate Turner, Lombard-Conrad LLC, reported they had contacted the various departments going into the new building and then developed the design. He reviewed the site survey. He displayed the conceptional site plan. Commissioner Nannini noted that this design would provide more security in the vestibules. Nate Turner stated that when the State Legislature legislatively acts then they would be above to control their entrances and exits. Nate Turner reviewed the offices to be located on the second level. He stated there would be a half basement for storage. He explained the materials they would use for the exterior of the building. He reviewed the changes to the annex. He submitted computer conceptualizations of the entrances to the older courthouse, the annex and the new building. Nate Turner stated they would have to remodel the annex for entryway through the basement. He would speak with the Assessor about the best way to get public access through the building at the basement level. Commissioner Ellison noted there would be no parking on Court Street. Nate Turner stated they changed that to the pedestrian access and landscaping. Commissioner Russell inquired about the cost of putting copper looking metal on the new building to match the old Courthouse. Nate Turner did not believe there would be a cost difference and would submit a new conceptualization showing the copper colors pursuant to their discussion. Commissioner Nannini and Myers thanked Cash Minor and Nate Turner for their efforts. The model was displayed to the meeting participants. Assemblyman John Carpenter asked if they would change the front of the older courthouse and received a negative response. Commissioner Ellison commented that this would bring the county offices into one location. Commissioner Russell voiced concern about the pedestrians crossing to the governmental complex. Assemblyman John Carpenter inquired about the security issue at the buildings. Commissioner Nannini stated they had limited the access and hoped to plan for future legislation regarding secured access. Assemblyman Carpenter voiced concern about the motel and the real estate office in the future being removed and the plain looking backside toward Idaho Street being exposed. Commissioner Russell felt it may become another parking lot and could be landscaped. Commissioner Ellison noted that there would be no

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 3 tax increase. Commissioner Eklund-Brown suggested more roof line in the future toward the Idaho Street side to make its appearance more acceptable. MOTION: Commissioner Nannini moved to approve the final design for the new office building with moderate changes designed by Lombard and Conrad. Commissioner Russell seconded the motion. The motion was passed by majority vote. Nate Turner and Cash Minor were commended upon their efforts.

IV. FEDERAL 1872 MINING LAW REVISION ISSUE: Update by Debbie Struhsacker regarding issues related to recent Congressional activity to revise provisions of the 1872 Mining Law including potential impacts to the mining industry and the Elko County economy. Debbie Struhsacker, Environmental Permitting and Government Relations Consultant, submitted written copies of her presentation. She began working on the issue in 1993 when she helped with the founding of the Women’s Mining Coalition. Debbie Struhsacker commented that Congressman Rahall introduced legislative bill H.R. 2262 in May and there were three hearings on the bill. She stated tomorrow the Committee on Natural Resources would markup the bill to get it out of committee. They anticipated that once voted out of committee it would go to the house floor for vote in mid November. She believed that the Senate would be active on this issue. Debbie Struhsacker reviewed Senator Reid’s testimony during the field hearing held in August at Elko. She noted that Senator Reid believed the law should be updated to end the uncertainty on this issue. She commented upon the impacts to Nevada if HR 2262 was passed as written by Congressman Rahall. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired if it would reduce the net proceeds because of reduced mining activity. Debbie Struhsacker replied in the affirmative and noted the gross royalty would be taken before the companies calculated the Nevada Net Proceeds royalty taken out. Debbie Struhsacker reviewed the top 10 problems with HR 2262: 1) Limits right to use public lands for mineral purposes; 2) Gross royalty with no deductions for costs; 3) Mine veto by federal land managers; 4) Mill site restrictions; 5) Land withdrawals; 6) No life-of-mine permits/uncertain permit renewals; 7) New and duplicative environmental standards; 8) New complex permit system; 9) Unworkable water provisions; and 10) Enforcement mechanisms. Commissioner Ellison asked that Debbie explain the difference between Gross and Net Royalties. Debbie Struhsacker explained that the proposed royalties were similar to what coal and oil were being taxed. She explained with hard rock mining there were costs associated to process the ore into a marketable product unlike coal and oil. She commented that net royalty would allow the

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 4 mines to deduct the costs of processing the ore to a marketable product. Commissioner Ellison commented he had met with Senator Reid and they spoke about the difference between gross and net proceeds. Debbie Struhsacker asked them to continue their support for the mining industry and believed input from County officials was influential on Capitol Hill. Commissioner Russell inquired about projections on the loss of jobs relating to these provisions or economic projections. Debbie Struhsacker believed that research was in the process. Commissioner Eklund-Brown noted that Dr. Harris had just completed a Socio Economical Impact Mining study which may be utilized. Debbie Struhsacker believed they should submit that information when the bill went to the floor. Commissioner Russell commented the governmental royalty provisions may result in less revenue to the federal government than what they anticipated. Debbie Struhsacker asked that they support Congressman Dean Heller tomorrow morning at the committee markup. MOTION: Commissioner Eklund-Brown moved to forward the mining study to all congressional delegates and representatives for use against this bill, and for the Commission to draft a letter with as much information they received, in a condensed form, contingent on chairman’s approval. Commissioner Myers seconded the motion. Commissioner Myers felt they should voice strong opposition to the bill within the letter. Commissioner Ellison noted that NACO would come out with an opposition letter also. Commissioner Eklund-Brown amended her motion to send copies of Dr. Harris’ report to Western Counties Alliance and NACO for support. Commissioner Myers seconded the amendment. The motion was passed unanimously. Assemblyman Carpenter encouraged that they come out in strong opposition to this bill. He inquired of Debbie if this bill had to get through this session of Congress. Debbie Struhsacker understood that Senator Reid hoped it could be accomplished this session of Congress by 2008. She stated Senator Reid wanted to end this discussion during this legislative session.

V. NEVADA DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES (NDWR): Discussion and consideration of a potential assessments by NDWR for the Ten Mile / Dixie Creek drainage basins for ground water survey work affecting parcels in the Spring Creek, Ten Mile, Lucky Nugget and other areas and all other matters related, thereto.

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 5 Joe Aguirre introduced Robert Martinez. Robert Martinez, of the Nevada Division of Water Resources, explained that water right assessments would be imposed in the Ten Mile/Dixie Creek drainage basins for groundwater survey work. He reviewed the Nevada Division of Water Resources authorization under NRS Chapters 533, 534 and 535. He explained some of the State Water Engineer’s duties pertaining to artificial recharge, primary and secondary water applications, use of effluent, groundwater basin pumping and mapping of water right appropriations. Robert Martinez explained they had a number of adjudications, existing water rights and vested water rights on surface water, within Elko County. He acknowledged that Elko County submitted a Water Plan to the State Engineer for review. He stated they were also involved with subdivision reviews, well drilling logs, well drilling regulations and also the Safety Dams Program. Robert Martinez stated from the time the application gets to the State Engineer’s Office it takes 100 days until there was a decision made on the water application. He stated then there was a protest period for thirty days. Robert Martinez stated there was a backlog with the applications so it was taking over one year. He noted that protests, hearings and rulings may make the passage of the application longer. Robert Martinez reviewed some of the criteria under NRS 533.370. He stated their decisions regarding groundwater allocation was based on perennial yield. Robert Martinez reported that the State of Nevada was broken up into 332 groundwater basins and they try to allocate those based on perennial yield. He reviewed the other duties and management tools they use: papered water rights versus water actually pumped; designation of groundwater basins, provide administration over the water basins, monitoring by water level measurements; administer supplemental water rights to augment water flows, groundwater, water well when no surface water was available; preferred uses: best use of water such as municipal and industrial uses. Robert Martinez displayed a map showing all the hydrographic basins within the State. He stated out of the 332 basins they have designated 120 basins. He explained crop and pumpage inventories and reported that they were mapping and monitoring wells. He reported in Elko County they do nine crop inventories, monitor 62 wells, and semiannual data collection on 14 precipitation gauges. Robert Martinez explained the State Engineer had the ability to assess water right holders or the users within a basin. He stated for the Ten Mile/Dixie Basin, Order #848 occurred on September 6, 1984 allowing for assessment. In April 2, 1996, the State Engineer issued a curtailment of new appropriations under Order #1120. Robert Martinez stated the assessments would go through County Commissioners. Commissioner Eklund-Brown asked if they were approving any additional irrigation water rights. Robert Martinez replied no. He explained the groundwater assessment was levied through the County Commissioners annually as a special

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 6 assessment. Robert Martinez stated the assessment was determined upon the total number of water rights and the use such as agricultural or municipal. Robert Martinez explained that if it was municipal use then the County could make each assessment to each individual parcel holder or organization. He stated the Division would determine the amount needed based upon their expenses incurred to manage that groundwater source and then they would send that notice to the County. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired if they had reviewed the Spring Creek/Lamoille Master Plan that had been approved and was tied into the Elko County Water Plan. Robert Martinez had not looked at that but the water planning section was currently reviewing the plan. Kristin McQueary commented that most people in Spring Creek were through the Spring Creek Utility Company and they did not have individual wells. She inquired if they would assess the utility which was a not-for-profit entity. Robert Martinez stated it was an advalorem assessment and the total allocations were predominately not agriculture. He reported they were working with the GIS people and the County on how to assess the residents in that basin. Kristin McQueary inquired if the County would get any credit for the Elko County Water Plan. Robert Martinez replied no. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired if the USGS study would help. Robert Martinez stated the study would help augment the studies being performed by the State. Robert Martinez reviewed the 2000 legislation passed on the parceling and dedication of water rights. He stated the State Engineer’s Office tried not to duplicate water measurements. He stated there were 62 wells monitored in Elko County and in the Dixie Creek area they monitored ten wells. Commissioner Russell inquired if Elko County could monitor the wells and send them a report. Robert Martinez inquired if they had a water engineer on staff to read the meters and do the inventory of the water rights. He stated that if they did the water level monitoring it would lessen some of the costs. Commissioner Russell inquired what the inventory consisted of. Robert Martinez stated there were 400 permits and a lot of those permits reside with the utilities. He explained they would look at each wellhead and read the meter and take a number of the stock they utilized. He stated they would GPS in that the location, review the crops, estimate the water use and generate a report. Commissioner Russell inquired if Elko County could hire a contractor to check the 62 water wells. Robert Martinez replied the state had a local office and they had estimated it would cost $3,000 annually to do the inventories and monitoring. Commissioner Russell inquired if it would be worth $3,000 to the Assessor’s Office to add this tax to the tax roll. Joe Aguirre stated it would take one employee a week to add this to the tax roll and cost approximately $1,500. He believed this assessment would be continual and become more than just a dollar in the future. Joe Aguirre questioned putting this on the ad valorem

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 7 because of the tax caps. Robert Martinez noted a County Ordinance would not let them assess anything less than $1.00. He stated they withheld the assessment for three years so the assessment would be for $9,000 for the prior 3 years. He stated they would have to do the assessment every other year. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired what assessment they were charging in Pahrump and Robert Martinez replied $50,000 for the Pahrump basin. He reported that for the Humboldt River Basin they were charging 28 cents per acre foot. In North Fork it was 5 cents per acre foot. Robert Martinez commented that Pahrump had a conversion from agriculture rights to municipal which explained the increase in their assessment. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired if the 60 basins were being currently assessed and received an affirmative response. There was a discussion about payment of the assessment and possible penalties for non payment. Robert Martinez noted some of the last USGS studies were performed in 1940. He stated they were collecting data relative to the water right allocations. He stated in the early 1970s permits were issued and now growth had impacted the permits. He noted the larger ranches had been subdivided which caused water impacts. Commissioner Russell commented that the Central Nevada Regional Water Authority through the USGS had collected data on the domestic and other water wells. He stated that had been presented to the Nevada Division of Water Resources for the creation of a data base. Commissioner Russell stated they were looking at the protocol of citizens collecting data on their wells. Robert Martinez noted that there were five bills in the legislation that affected water resources: Senate Bills 267, 274, 275, and Assembly Bills 296 and 331. Commissioner Eklund-Brown stated that there had been a letter sent to the State Engineer’s Office. She noted specific questions were asked in the letter. Robert Martinez reported upon the information upon their web site.

VI. 2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM (CDBG): 2:00 p.m. In accordance with Notice 52-2007, conduct a third Public Hearing for the purpose of obtaining the views of citizens regarding the types of projects to submit for funding applications to the 2008 Community Development Block Grant Program. The County Commission may rank projects at this meeting for submission to the State CDBG Program. Lynn Forsberg, CDBG Elko County Administrator and Public Works Director, presented a list of the projects. He noted they could only submit one application and asked they designate a priority project together with an alternative.

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 8 MOTION: Commissioner Russell moved to make the Jarbidge solid waste upgrade in the amount of $110,000 their number one priority. Commissioner Nannini seconded the motion. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired what their alternative project would be and suggested the lighting in Jackpot. Commissioner Russell amended his motion to include the Jackpot pedestrian lighting project as the alternative. Commissioner Nannini seconded the amendment. The motion was passed unanimously. Lynn Forsberg submitted a written report from CDBG showing what their projects were in the past. He stated Elko County had done well with CDBG grant funding. Commissioner Nannini noted they would hold a meeting with NDOT tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. Chairman Ellison called a recess at 2:38 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 2:45 p.m.

VII. ELKO COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT: A. Discussion of Sheriff Department issues including operational reports, statistics, communications and all other matters related, thereto. Lt. Doug Gailey stated that they were working shorthanded but they may get in compliance with the last POST training being completed. He reported they purchased two new dogs, one for Elko and one for the Wells areas to fight the drug problem. He reviewed the statistics for last month: 2,584 calls for service; 52,984 miles traveled; 33 arrests; wrote 154 reports and issued 198 citations. Lt. Doug Gailey stated they had a new commissary system and the jail meals were being provided at a reduced price. He reviewed the jail statistics of 110 inmates at the end of October, with 313 bookings and of those bookings 214 stayed more than 4 hours. Lt. Doug Gailey stated that 126 inmates stayed between 4 hours and 72 hours. B. Washoe County Coroners Office: Discussion and consideration of approval of an Interlocal Agreement for Forensic Services that provides such services as autopsies and medical examinations from the Washoe County Coroner’s Office. Sheriff Dale Lotspeich asked for approval of the Interlocal Agreement. He explained that Washoe County had combined the medical examiner services and the coroner’s office together. MOTION: Commissioner Myers moved to approve an Interlocal Agreement for Forensic Services with the Washoe County

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 9 Coroner’s Office. Commissioner Eklund-Brown seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.

C. Washoe County Sheriff’s Office Crime Lab: Discussion and consideration of approval of a Forensic Support Services Agreement that provides such services such as toxicology and other lab testing procedures with the Washoe County Sheriff’s Office Crime Lab. Sheriff Dale Lotspeich explained this was a renewal contract with a regional crime lab who received state funding but that funding did not cover all the fees. Commissioner Ellison inquired if it was part of his budget. Sheriff Lotspeich replied it may be an increase over what he had budgeted for but there would be no significant impact. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired about video testimony and the hourly charge for their testifying. Sheriff Lotspeich replied those costs come from District Attorney’s budget. Kristin McQueary stated the District Attorney tried to mitigate those situations through telephone testimony to eliminate the travel expenses. She suggested they speak to Liz Watson to get those costs. MOTION: Commissioner Nannini moved to approve a Forensic Support Services Agreement for toxicology and other lab testing procedures with the Washoe County Sheriff’s Office Crime Lab. Commissioners Myers and Russell seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.

VIII. ELKO COUNTY LIQUOR BOARD: Discussion and consideration of approval of a Liquor License for Steven M. Stork / Tri-R&S Holdings, LLC doing business as Muley’s Bar & Family Grill in Spring Creek and all other matters related, thereto. Chairman Ellison called the Liquor Board to order at 2:55 p.m. and adjourned the Board at 2:56 p.m.

IX. ELKO COUNTY JUVENILE PROBATION DEPARTMENT: NON-ACTION ITEM A. Discussion of Juvenile Probation Department issues including the Juvenile Detention and Juvenile Probation Monthly Report and all other matters related, thereto. Michael Pederson submitted a monthly written report. B. Discussion and consideration of a request for the appointment of Commission Liaison(s) to the Juvenile Probation Department and all other matters related, thereto.

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 10 Commissioner Ellison commented that Commissioners Nannini and Eklund- Brown had been previously appointed as liaisons. MOTION: Commissioner Myers moved to reaffirm the January 2nd decision to appoint Commissioners Nannini and Eklund- Brown as the Commission’s Liaison to the Juvenile Probation Department. Commissioner Russell seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. Commissioner Eklund-Brown noted Judge Memeo had sent them a letter stating they had used some funding for the community service person for Teen Court. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired if they could pool their resources for a Community Service person. She asked Michael Pedersen to contact Cash Minor about the particulars. Cash Minor explained it was funded for a part-time position. Michael Pederson stated their department was under the assumption that program was not running. Commissioner Eklund-Brown reported they had received a log of what community service had been performed.

XIV. BOARD OF COUNTY HIGHWAY COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Myers called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. and adjourned the Highway Board at 3:35 p.m. Chairman Ellison called a recess at 3:35 p.m. and reconvened the regular meeting at 3:41 p.m. XVI. ELKO COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPEAL HEARING: 3:30 P.M. James and Theresa Currivan: Appeal of a Denied request a Tentative Map for Division into Large Parcels: In accordance with Notice 49-2007 and Elko County Code 4-9-10, continue a Public Hearing of an appeal of an action taken by the Elko County Planning Commission. James and Theresa Currivan are appealing their denied request for a Tentative Map for Division into Large Parcels. In addition to the appeal, the Currivans are asking for alternative compliance concerning roadway dedication. The Board of County Commissioners shall continue a hearing that was tabled on April 5, 2007. Both the appeal and alternative compliance are for property described as follows: Section 10 and 15, T.36N., R.60E., M.D.B&M, located in Starr Valley and accessed by State Route 230. 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 a portion thereof, back to the Elko County Planning Commission for further consideration. Randy Brown commented that this public hearing was a continuation from

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 11 the April meeting. He noted the Commission had tabled the issue until the Army Corps of Engineers participation, authorization and well as the question of jurisdiction was answered. Randy Brown reported that they had a letter of case closure from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection. He stated they issued an order and permit to cross Ackler Creek. Randy Brown stated the Army Corps of Engineers stated they had no jurisdiction because the bridge was being built above the high water level. He stated the bridge was designed by a local engineer and stamped. Randy Brown believed the bridge was being built at this time. He stated the engineer would provide an inspection report upon the completion of bridge. He stated there was no requirement for a building permit as long as it was stamped by a structural engineer. Randy Brown noted he had received several phone calls on what could take place. He reiterated this was a tentative map and no final action could be made such as a final map. He stated if the tentative map was approved, final map would go back before the Planning Commission for their denial or approval. Commissioner Eklund-Brown disclosed that Randy Brown was her husband. She disclosed that there was no pecuniary interest for either of them. She did not know the Currivans and did not have a listing under her real estate license. She did not have any buyers lined up, if this went through. Commissioner Russell disclosed he was escorted by a property owner to observe that area. He stated it would not prejudice him. Commissioner Eklund- Brown also disclosed that she toured the area with Mr. Gerber. Randy Brown noted they were asking for alternate compliance from the public road issue. He felt that if the tentative map was approved there would be several notes and disclosures on that tentative map. Logically speaking, his opinion was they could not provide emergency services or County services to that region. He stated these issues would be brought up upon the final map. Commissioner Eklund-Brown commented that solid waste was an issue. She stated the emergency services had keys for access but questioned how solid waste would be addressed. Randy Brown replied possibly through keys or the service would not be provided to that area. Robert Stokes stated under public comments they received two phone calls in opposition from Linda Agnew and Victoria Bily. He reported they received a faxed letter from Fred and Jennifer Garrett in opposition. He stated they also received letters of opposition from Muriel Thomas and Melanie Chacon. Robert Stokes stated earlier today they had received a copy of an e-mail to NDEP from Daniel and Carolee Jones regarding the permits. Robert Stokes noted the County Commissioners had also received a letter individually from the Jones. Kristin McQueary commented that this was denied at the Planning Commission level. She suggested they take a brief public comment period and

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 12 asked the people who had submitted comments previously not duplicate their testimony. Carolee Jones, Starr Valley resident, commented that they had sent several communications to the Commission. She stated many of the issues discussed at the previous meeting were still of great concern to them. Their major concern was regarding the condition of the road. Carolee Jones noted the County had not replied to their letter sent in April. However, Commissioner Nannini had spoken to them by phone. Carolee Jones stated some issues were not resolved such as safety and protecting the property rights of the current community. At the close of the meeting in April, it was stated the tentative map could be presented at a later date if the conditions of the motion had been met. She asked the Board to define the details of the requirements of the motion. She believed they would hear from the members of the community about new issues and old issues that were unresolved. Carolee Jones stated their frustration with the inconsistencies, after reading the Nevada Revised Statutes, the Elko County Code and the requirements of the Division of Land into Large Parcels. She commented that the Currivans were told to construct a 26’ rural gravel road and have a 60 foot right-of- way. She questioned why the Currivans would do that because it was not required under the Rules for the Division of Land into Large Parcels. Carolee Jones believed that regulation came from Elko County Code Title 5, Chapter 4 under improvements for a major subdivision. She stated that if they were required to do these two things under these guidelines was it inconsistent not to require them to do all the regulations under a major subdivision. Carolee Jones noted the County insisted and the County accepted major subdivision requirements. She questioned why they previously discussed the access for emergency services and a secondary access if there was no legal requirement for them, unless these issues were very important. Carolee Jones expressed concern for the people who would make their home on the proposed lots because the emergency vehicles could not access the area for the majority of the year. She understood that the County would require disclosures upon each deed indicating that emergency access could not be guaranteed. She noted the burden that this placed upon their community in the event of an emergency. Carolee Jones believed this project and any other similar project should not be approved until the Elko County Code could be better defined. She believed a standard should be established. She noted that David Stanton stated the Currivans built the road to county standard. She asked that the standard be defined. She inquired if it just had to be 26 feet wide and how long it had to remain 26 feet wide. Carolee Jones commented that the 26 foot road width only remained that wide for six months in several places. She commented that the places where the road cracked and fell off were filled with sand. She understood the road was not subject to approval until the final map

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 13 was submitted but she questioned public safety. Carolee Jones noted she had asked the Board to rectify the situation above her property at their previous meeting. Carolee Jones stated the Currivans had indicated that the threat of vehicles rolling off the road was a technical issue. She questioned if it was a technical issue if a vehicle rolled off and landed on a person, animal or damaged private property. Carolee Jones noted it was indicated by the Currivans that they would assume the responsibility for maintenance and repair of that road which would later be passed on to the homeowners’ association. Carolee Jones understood an association would be formed after 75% of the lots had been sold. Until that time, she asked what guarantee would be in place that the Currivans would maintain the road. She inquired if there would be a legal document in place in case the Currivans move. Carolee Jones stressed the issues of health and safety. Carolee Jones quoted Elko County Code, Title 5-1-2 and Title 5-1-3 into the record. She noted the County could approve the map with conditions but it was not a mandate. Carolee Jones asked that they hold their approval until the serious issues were addressed and resolved. She expressed concern for the community’s health, safety and welfare. She thanked the Commissioners for their time and interest. Carolee Jones encouraged the project to be completed with compliance of the regulations in order to assure the health, safety and welfare of the community. She stated other community members would be presenting testimony. Commissioner Ellison noted that new information was brought up. Jim Wachtel opposed the approval of the tentative map. He voiced concern that the water wells drilled may impact his water rights on a spring. He noted that there were springs below and asked what they would do if the wells affected them. He stated this development would change the whole area, if it was approved. He felt that it would set precedence and the entire east side of the road from Welcome to Secret Pass would be sold to developers because this would harm the ranching industry. Jill Oswald-Gerber, Starr Valley Resident, stated she and Mike agreed that the Currivans had property rights but did not agree that they should simultaneously damage the other people’s property and trample on their property rights. Jill Oswald-Gerber believed that the Currivans, in building the road poorly, had damaged her property, and exposed her personally to danger. She stated there had been degradation to her property and there may be liability from others that would be traveling that road who may be injured. She was waiting delivery of permanent signage to place on her property with regards to the landslides and narrowing of the road. Jill Oswald-Gerber stated that the hillside continues to slide down the steep hill. She displayed a picture taken several months ago showing a landslide onto the road. She agreed with Carolee Jones that it was a dry year and voiced concern with a wet winter. Jill Oswald-Gerber felt the 26 foot wide road

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 14 would be narrower by next spring because of the landslides. Jill Oswald-Gerber stated she did not know if putting up the signs would increase her liability but she felt ethically obligated to warn people of the danger ahead. Jill Oswald-Gerber noted that when the landslides continue they would eventually block her irrigation ditch. She noted the irrigation ditch was the subject of another dispute and she was obligated to clear the irrigation ditch pursuant to the Humboldt Decree. Jill Oswald-Gerber commented that the Currivans had put in a letter to NDEP that they had placed two culverts to take care of drainage. Jill Oswald-Gerber stated the ditch must carry 10 gallons per second to her property line pursuant to the Humboldt Decree. She displayed a picture showing two, 6 ¼ pipes placed side by side and she did not believe they were oversized culverts. She believed that the excess water would wash out the road, go to Grant Gerber’s and the Jones’ property. Jill Oswald-Gerber asked that they not allow this project to continue until these dangerous situations were resolved. Commissioner Ellison inquired about the culverts and whose property it was on. Jill Oswald-Gerber stated they were on Grant Gerber’s property. She noted they would empty into her irrigation ditch which was about to be covered up by the landslide. Jay Black, Starr Valley resident, stated that since the 5th of April there was a lot of fire activity in that region. He stated that if the fire had gone into that area and it had been developed; the fire would have harmed a lot of people and their property. He did not think they could have gotten sufficient fire suppression to that area with that road to salvage property and save the peoples’ lives. He commented the fire in the valley traveled three miles in one and one-half hours. Dan Jones was in opposition and felt the road was unsafe. He noted the road was built to County standards but as they drive up there they have two blind corners with steep drop offs. He stated if anyone went off those drop offs they would end up on his property below. He stressed the safety issues on the road. He stated if there was a fire; they would not be able to get to the mesa to keep the fire from them. He believed the County could do better than give a disclosure on the deeds. Marty Hoots, neighboring landowner, questioned why there were not two access roads required on this. She felt the nature of the road leading to the area was dangerous and questioned the road requirement in the policy. She noted there were other roads up there but they were on private property and should not be considered as alternate accesses. She opposed this development. Commissioner Ellison inquired if there was a dedicated easement on the road. Marty Hoots stated it was not a dedicated road. Commissioner Eklund-Brown noted an alternate access was not a requirement. Marty Hoots stated she understood that this was a requirement if it went past more than 16 parcels and

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 15 this proposal was past sixteen parcels. She noted there was a previous subdivision tried in the 1980’s and there was a partial dedication with no road maintenance by the County. Marty Hoots opposed the passage of the tentative map. Jennifer Garrett stated she and her family opposed this subdivision proposal and felt there were many valid reasons to deny this subdivision: safety, increased vehicles on a road used by cattle, tractors, fire protection, only one access, health, welfare, and water/sewage development. Jennifer Garrett stated that a Colorado study showed that for every tax dollar generated by agricultural land cost fifty cents to service, while every tax dollar generated by developed land cost the County $1.30 to service. Jennifer Garrett stated there would be an increased cost for road maintenance, for schools, the Sheriff and the Fire Department services. She noted that there were many subdivisions within the County which were not full and questioned why there should be another one created that would cause a burden to the County. Jennifer Garrett stated private property rights were emphasized to the County Commissioners at the last meeting. She felt property rights were an important right but questioned why one person’s right was more important than another’s. Jennifer Garrett noted that the meeting room and hallway were packed at the last meeting with people in opposition of this subdivision as it was today because it would affect their private property rights and their way of doing business. She inquired if all the conditions requested at the last meeting had been addressed such as the road worthiness, permitting, culvert and drainage installation. Jennifer Garrett felt that these should be inspected and signed off by an inspector to insure they were in compliance. She felt that because of all the problems this development would bring with regards to health, welfare, safety, cost to the County, as well as the denial of all the other Starr Valley residents’ private property rights, the disapproval of this subdivision should be automatic. David Stanton, of Goicoechea and DiGrazia representing the Currivans, clarified that on April 5, 2007 they came before the Commissioner asking for the approval of a tentative map for 874.4 acres to be divided into 40 acre parcels. He believed there was some confusion that this was a subdivision but it was a division of land into large parcels. He noted this operated under NRS 278.471 thru NRS 278.4725. David Stanton reviewed NRS 278.472 and stated this statute provided the criteria for the map. David Stanton stated for the record “they believe there was nothing in the statute that gives the County the legal authority to reject a tentative map because of regulatory matter; for example involving completely different governmental agencies or anything else that was not within the scope of the statutory authority”. He commented that at the last meeting this Commission tabled the Currivan’s request for two specific reasons: 1) The Army Corps. of

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 16 Engineers and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection requirements pertaining to a bridge the Currivans had constructed over Ackler Creek in connection with this development as well as a portion of this road which triggered NDEP jurisdiction; 2) The Commission wanted assurance that any road compliance issues involving the Elko County Code had been taken care of to the extent of County jurisdiction. David Stanton commented that on the road issues they believed there were no further compliance issues. David Stanton stated with regards to the regulatory compliance issue the Currivans worked very closely with those agencies. He noted there were copies of letters from NDEP and the Army Corps of Engineers stating that they were in compliance. He commented that the Currivans did this at a cost of approximately $80,000 since the April 5, 2007 meeting. He noted there had been a discussion on the issue of alternate compliance in relation to the private road, which no one had opposed. David Stanton stated the other issues discussed at the April 5th meeting and were brought up again today by the neighbors as follows: the emergency access; opposition by neighbors of change of use; change of demographics in the area; lifestyle issues, etc. He stated this was not a political issue but a matter of the County Commission applying the NRS and the applicable Elko County Code as it was stated. He commented that philosophically this was a property rights issue. David Stanton had researched the 1979 Statute called Senate Bill 120 which gave the County regulatory authority over the division of land into 40 acres or more. He noted that one part of that Senate Bill was put under NRS 119.183. He read the NRS 119.183 statute into the record which pertained to the division of land into large parcels and stated it would not affect subdivisions. David Stanton stated that there was no responsibility on the part of the County for fire protection, for emergency access, or for road maintenance. He stated these were a lot of the issues the people opposing the development had brought up repeatedly. He noted another issue brought up outside the scope of this meeting was with a ditch which Dr. Jill Oswald-Gerber had spoken about being impacted by the road leading into the large parcel division. He noted this had been previously addressed at the last meeting and there was a pipeline adequate to address water flow. He stated a letter submitted by Kirk Owsley was presented to this Commission previously that stated this was outside the scope of this proceeding. David Stanton asked that they focus upon the two issues that caused the Commission to table this issue which were the regulatory issues relating to Ackler Creek Bridge and a section of the road together with the compliance to the Elko County Code. He felt the other issues should not be brought up again at this meeting. He stated that if the Commission followed the NRS and the Elko County Code both in substance and in spirit then the Commission should approve the tentative map without any contingencies and without any further delay.

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 17 David Stanton requested that this Commission approve the tentative map for division of land into large parcels with the requested alternate compliance. Commissioner Ellison noted Mr. Stanton had quoted NRS 119.183 statute. He inquired of Randy Brown if the Elko County Code regarding safety issues would supersede that NRS. Randy Brown stated if the County Code addressed that issue it would but it does not. He would use the NRS in the disclosures on any final map. Randy Brown felt that the disclosures should be in writing before any sales take place and upon the final plat to indemnify the whole situation with regards to the emergency services. Kristin McQueary noted the State statutes on the division of land into large parcels were very bare in comparison to other types of land development. She stated Mr. Stanton was correct in stating that the division of land into larger parcels was not a subdivision. Kristin McQueary noted that a subdivision had it owns statutory section and its own requirements. She stated both state and the County could impose more requirements on a subdivision. Kristin McQueary clarified that County Code could not supersede state law. She stated that NRS 119.183 dealt specifically with division of land into large parcels. She stated that was a tool that the County could use to look at these types of developments. She noted no County Code addressed that situation. Commissioner Eklund-Brown requested clarification that in a tentative map process the road did not have to be in existence at that time. She noted this work was performed prior to the final map. Commissioner Eklund-Brown believed that prior to the final map being approved the road would have to be to County standards and inspected. Randy Brown stated that assumption was correct. He stated the road was under private use so the County had no jurisdiction at this point. He stated if and when a final plat was approved then the County would have jurisdiction over the development criteria. Randy Brown stated during the tentative map process they generally outline the minimum standards that would be required and also outline the maintenance requirements on the roads. He stated when the road provided a primary access to the proposed division of land into large parcels; it would have to be reviewed again and meet the County requirements during the final process. Commissioner Eklund-Brown requested clarification that this road had not been County inspected. Randy Brown stated the road was not inspected by the County during the tentative map procedure. He explained the tentative map was given to the Planning Commission first for review same as the submittal of the final plat. However, during the final plat stages the development criteria would come into place such as the maintenance issues, the safety issues, etc. He stated the disclosures would come in during the final plat procedure. Kristin McQueary noted NRS 278.471(3) Preparation, contents and filing of tentative map; set forth what needed to be on the map such as existing

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 18 roads or proposed roads, and also existing easements for irrigation or drainage. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired if that meant they were accepting them in their present condition. Kristin McQueary clarified that it just showed the plan. She stated NRS 278.472 addressed the final map and read NRS 278.472 2 (a) through 4 (e) into the record. She believed the easement for video service providers would not apply to that area. Kristin McQueary felt they would be upon wells and septic systems unless a system was installed. Commissioner Eklund- Brown noted that had to be upon the map. She commented that the Clean Water Act and irrigation ditches were controlled by the State Division of Water Resources or NDEP which was part of the approval of the final map by those agencies. She stated the other agencies complied with the County’s road restrictions for different things. She noted some of the issues heard in protest were not under County jurisdiction. David Stanton stated they would have to go through more vigorous criteria in the final map stage. Chris Woster commented that the County gave the Currivans two specific tasks. He stated they had received NDEP approval and a letter from the Army Corps of Engineers stating they had no jurisdiction. He stated it was difficult to meet the NDEP requirements because they have specific slopes for erosion control and the Currivans hired a consultant. Chris Woster stated there was a verification of the Access Permit to the NDOT right-of-way. He believed the road would stabilize over time with compaction. The road was built wider in places because subsidence served the same as the compaction effort to stabilize. Chris Woster stated the drainage ditches, the culverts and the locations of the culverts comply with all the intelligent design that should be in place for a road of this nature. He stated the alternate compliance issue would be addressed by the attorneys. Chris Woster felt the tentative map was worthy of their consideration since those two specific tasks had been complied with. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired of Chris Woster if the condition of the road was not the final product. Chris Woster reported that there had been some compaction efforts on the road that had subsided and it would be an ongoing effort. He stated it would be in the best interest of the Currivans throughout the process to have access for the people it would be serving. He stated they would deal with the staff item by item during the final plat stages. Commissioner Eklund- Brown asked what stage the bridge was in. Chris Woster stated the abutments were in and they were getting ready to put on the decking. He believed it should be done by the first of November depending upon the weather. Commissioner Eklund-Brown understood that was under the jurisdiction of the NDEP and they would have final inspection. Chris Woster stated that the NDEP would look at the BMPs had been adhered to during the construction process. He explained that

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 19 NDEP would make sure the stream had not been violated but would not look at the structure of the bridge. Chris Woster stated they did have a permit with NDEP to build the bridge across that waterway. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired who would give their final approval of the bridge. Chris Woster stated that the final approval of the bridge would go to the County as the reviewing agency by the structural engineer of record. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired about approval by NDOT. Chris Woster stated the Currivans had an occupancy permit for the approach that served the subdivision. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired if that NDOT permit would be transferred to Tent Mountain LLC. Mr. Currivan stated it was to the homeowners’ association. Jill Oswald Gerber inquired of Mr. Woster what had been done to stabilize the slopes on her land. Chris Woster stated the areas where slopes were of steepness that the NDEP wanted to see their required management practices put into place, and that had been done. He stated in areas where they knew there would be some subsidence, it was outside the travel, the road prism, and the normal consequence of gravity and time would continue to consolidate those roads. He stated that as time went on it would to become more minimal. George Lostra reported that he was hired by the Currivans to design the bridge crossing. He stated they designed the bridge to the actual standards for an HS 20 loading, which was the normal highway loading. He described the structure of the bridge. He stated the reinforced concrete was constructed by High Mark Construction and they had inspected it. George Lostra stated it was built according to plans. George Lostra stated they were currently working on the steel structure. He believed in the next two or three weeks the bridge would be complete. George Lostra assured them that the bridge was being built according to their plans and met the normal loading requirements for that type of bridge. He stated it was similar to the bridges that were constructed for the County on those types of roads. Melanie Chacon, from Starr Valley, stated she had heard two different terms, subdivision and large parcel division. She understood a subdivision was intended for residences and a large parcel may or may not be. She believed this action was intended for residences. Commissioner Eklund-Brown explained both land divisions could have residences but this was for large land division which had different criteria. Melanie Chacon felt that even though the lot size may be larger the human life and property would still be at risk. Commissioner Eklund-Brown noted the regulations came from the legislature. Kristin McQueary asked Randy Brown to explain the alternate compliance request to the Board. Randy Brown stated the request for alternate compliance was a request

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 20 from Elko County Code 5-2-17 that requires an easement or right of way to be offered for dedication to the public. He stated the alternate compliance request was for the roadway to become an irrevocable private easement. Randy Brown explained that the easement could not be revoked. The road and the easement would remain in private ownership. He stated the second part was a request from a minimum radius on the road from 100 feet to 92 feet radius. Commissioner Eklund-Brown inquired about the safe haven turnaround. Randy Brown explained that was a different portion of the road. He stated there was a minimum requirement in the Elko County Code that required a minimum radius of any curve to be 100 feet or more. Commissioner Ellison closed the public comment period. He asked the Commissioners if they had any comments and asked that they clarify any motion. Commissioner Myers stated he was a strong advocate for personal property rights. He expressed concern about the fire, medical and road issues previously spoken upon. He noted that historically the people would eventually come in and demand services on the road and someone would try to sue them because of the emergency services. He questioned why they would put County residents in that type of situation. He was torn between property rights and the health, safety and welfare issues. He voiced concern on the alternate compliance. Commissioner Eklund-Brown noted that she sat upon several different boards that were land use planning oriented. At the State Land Use Planning Advisory Council, they heard a lot about conservation easements. She stated in Clover Valley they had dealt with a greater degree on the conservation easements. Commissioner Eklund-Brown felt that unless they were going to compensate for property rights or purchase the property outright; they do not have the ability to restrict their land. She stated it was a “takings” issue if they were restricting someone unnecessarily from developing their land. She noted there was already precedence in Starr Valley with parceling whether it was for friends, for family or for profit. Commissioner Eklund-Brown stated there was no master plan in place on file and felt that it could not restrict that. She stated the Commission could not stop someone from developing their property. She felt open space, loss of agriculture, urban interface issues with wildlife, and fire issues they could address. Commissioner Eklund-Brown noted the law was very specific what the Commission could address such as the access and the road. She stated everything else had to be signed off by the various agencies involved. Commissioner Eklund-Brown believed that a guardrail may be something that they could address and the erosion problems. She stated it had to be a good product to pass the final inspection to get the final map approval. She noted the road was not meant to be at that standard, at this time. Commissioner Eklund-Brown acknowledged there was a road there and there would have to be compliance in

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 21 the end. She was glad that the new bridge would be above the water and it would be to a standard that people could use year around. She believed there would be access issues into the area in the winter but that was throughout the County. Commissioner Eklund-Brown stated the Commission would make sure that all State and County laws were complied with. Commissioner Nannini agreed with Commissioner Eklund-Brown that there was not much the Commission could do if the Currivans had met all the letters of the law. Randy Brown noted the Currivans had met all the requirements established at the last meeting. Commissioner Nannini requested clarification that there was another phase. Randy Brown stated there would be a final map. Commissioner Nannini inquired if there was a compromise for partial development. He noted they could develop twenty-one lots. Randy Brown stated they could negotiate according to state statute. Commissioner Nannini commented upon the potential traffic if the lots were all sold. Randy Brown stated they estimated five vehicle trips per day for the traffic standard which would mean 110 vehicles per day if it was completely developed. Commissioner Russell stated 874 acres divided into 40 acres come to 22 residences. He believed they were looking at 66 new residents residing in that area; which amount would be higher than the total population that currently reside in that area. He felt that population increase had to be considered. He believed it would be wrong to apply standards selectively to property owners. He felt there were developers that would like to develop more property. Commissioner Russell stated some of them may want to change their mind about being a rancher in the future and want to develop their property. At that time, he did not believe they would want the rules to be applied differently to them from anyone else. Therefore, he felt there should be equity in justice while applying rules. Commissioner Russell emphasized the Board had to be fair, according to the law, to every single person and could not pick and choose whether it was popular or an unpopular development. Commissioner Russell voiced concern with David Stanton’s statement because he felt the Board had a moral obligation to look at the health, safety and welfare of the citizens on private property as well as on public property. He commented that they perform home inspections to make sure that the product would meet all the health and safety codes. He believed, under the general framework, we have a moral obligation to look at the road as part of that obligation. Commissioner Russell expressed concern that there was such a division between the property owner and the residents in that area. He stated potential harm to other people’s property may be dealt with in a civil court. He commented that if a road sloughed off and damaged someone’s property; they could go to civil court for damages which occurred or if such damage was to a drainage ditch, etc., there was some obligation. Commissioner Russell voiced

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 22 concern with the alternative compliance because of the multitude of disagreements with residents and increase of population. He believed he would vote in favor of the developer and overturn the Planning Commission’s decision. Commissioner Ellison noted this would probably come back before the County Commission and at that time it could address the roads. Randy Brown believed that it would be appealed at the Planning Commission’s level on the final map. He stated the roads issues, emergency services, water and sewer, and everything else would be addressed in that final plat stage. Randy Brown commented that at that time they could ask the developer to provide certain things. He noted the property owners agreed to the Commissioners’ previous requests. Commissioner Ellison inquired if they approved the tentative map if the lots could be sold today. Randy Brown replied in the negative and explained that the Planning Commission or this board had to approve the final plat. He referred to Commissioner Russell’s concern on the alternate compliance issue and explained the alternate compliance would be an irrevocable private easement. He stated the right-of-way would remain in private ownership and would not restrict access to emergency services. Randy Brown explained that if the County took the roads into public ownership; the County would have to guarantee those emergency services because of the public right of way situation. He believed that NRS 119 would come into effect in the future. Randy Brown voiced concern with passage upon the road in the wintertime. Commissioner Russell noted in prior cases the County had accepted the road for right-of-way for purposes of utilities and not for maintenance. He commented that they had obligated the property owners to form a group to maintain the road. Randy Brown noted in this circumstance they had a parcel map previously approved by this Board for the same alternate compliance on the first portion of the road. He clarified that they would be accepting a road right of way from the private end of that road to the end of this proposed area as public. Kristin McQueary noted the only issue in agreement between the developer and the neighbors was that the access road would remain a private access road. She explained that through the first parcel process they were granted an alternative compliance. Commissioner Ellison voiced concern with the access issues for the twenty-two new residences in the future. Kristin McQueary reiterated that the developers would have to agree that it was an irrevocable easement to guarantee access to future property owners. Randy Brown displayed a map and explained a private easement was on the first portion of the road. He pointed out the ingress and egress to the highway. He stated an easement was created by deed many years ago and recorded. He pointed out the second portion, which was the first parcel map area, and it created a portion of the road which crossed Ackler Creek. He stated that second portion was granted alternate compliance for private irrevocable easement under parcel

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 23 map appeal. Randy Brown pointed on the map the portion of the road from the first parcel map section to the Currivan property. He explained they were in a similar situation as the first parcel map. Randy Brown clarified that if the County accepted the road as a public easement then they would have two private easements on the road that the County did not have jurisdiction over in order to get to the public right of way. Commissioner Eklund-Brown clarified that the Currivans through agreements had the authority to utilize both of those easements to access that property. Randy Brown stated that there a Court Order that stated the people had the right to use the road and any new roads that were built. Kristin McQueary stated that was an over simplification but for purposes of this hearing she felt it was permissive. Commissioner Nannini noted that this Board had concern about fire issues and safety issues. He commented that several Commissioners had witnessed the fire in the valley. He inquired how they could keep the current owners protected yet follow the law. He commented upon the value of the land and personal property in that area. Commissioner Nannini believed that in the future the people that moved into the region would demand services. Randy Brown stated these issues had to be disclosed prior to the sale. He stated the Commission could ask the developer, under these types of situations, for things. He stressed the importance of keeping track and leaving a paper trail as to what happened at the specific point in time and to what the feelings were of this Board with regards to emergency services and the private property rights. Commissioner Ellison noted that there was concern expressed that until 75% of these lots there sold there would be no homeowners’ association formed or bonding. He inquired if that could be addressed. Randy Brown understood it would be the developers’ responsibility for that road maintenance until 75% of the land was developed. He stated at this time there was no statute to require that. Kristin McQueary stated that the Legislature did not give them many tools and reviewed NRS 119.183. She read NRS 119.183 into the record. Commissioner Russell inquired if these $300,000 to $400,000 homes could be developed in the area but because the developer had alienated the whole community there would be no obligation for the Volunteer Fire Department to help them. Randy Brown noted under the County’s building and fire protection codes they would be required to have large cisterns or sprinklers for fire protection. He stated those types of things could get addressed but what Kristin McQueary was addressing was the fact that the fire truck may not be able to get to their house. Commissioner Eklund-Brown had spoken to Mr. Byers about insurance issues. She had been informed that parcels out in the middle of nowhere would get the highest rating. She stated that insurance rating could be written into Code. Randy Brown stated that was in code and there were several divisions that

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 24 required cisterns for fire protection. Kristin McQueary stated for legal protection because the access was provided by a private easement; that easement applies to the people buying the lots and the neighbors who had access rights under other Court decisions. However, almost every area within Elko County was serviced by a Volunteer Fire Department. Kristin McQueary noted that the Volunteer Fire Department may not be able to get to the fire at any one time but that was the same throughout the County. She felt the neighbors would be there to the best of their ability no matter what happened and would not hold a grudge on the new people. Chris Woster noted there were questions previously why they had built the road and bridge to that standard. He stated that was why the road was built that way and the bridge would be strong enough to support the NDF emergency vehicles. He stated that if the Building Department did their job and ample fire protection was there; the road and bridge were there for them to get to the fire. Commissioner Ellison asked if Chris Woster had seen pictures of the road. Chris Woster stated he had viewed the road several days ago. Commissioner Ellison inquired if the road was built to standard. Chris Woster stated it was wider in most cases than the County road standard. He stated that they knew there were steep slopes and they had the NDEP address all of the erosion conditions. He commented that they were given best management practices on how to control that. He stated they did what NDEP told them to do. He commented that they had gotten approval from several agencies and addressed the Board’s concerns. Commissioner Nannini inquired what would happen if they denied it. Kristin McQueary stated the Currivans would have to consult with their attorneys to decide what type of action they wish to pursue. She stated they could move it to the court system and they would look to see if the Commission correctly applied the facts. She noted they had limited law to apply to the multitude of facts. MOTION: Commissioner Eklund-Brown moved to overrule the action of the Elko County Planning Commission and approve the tentative map for division into large parcels for James and Theresa Currivan with items in Staff Comments 6 A through M. Kristin McQueary inquired about approval of the alternative compliance. Commissioner Eklund-Brown amended the motion to include approval of the alternative compliance.

Motion died due to lack of a second. The Board discussed approving the tentative map and not approving the alternate compliance. They discussed the involvement of the Planning Department. Commissioner Myers commented that Commissioner Eklund-

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 25 Brown’s motion failed because no one seconded it. He questioned if they could approve the tentative map without the alternative compliance. He noted they would have a private entrance road with a portion of the road being public after the private section. Commissioner Eklund-Brown noted the County could not guarantee access into the public portion of the road. She read Staff Comments items 6A through 6M into the record. Commissioner Ellison inquired if the requirement of 70% development could be changed. Kristin McQueary stated alternate compliance meant instead of having this dedicated as a public roadway it would continue to be a private easement. She commented that there was no other road in Elko County that was not connected to another public right of way. She advised them against approving it as public roadway because they had no access to it. She urged them to approve it with the alternate compliance if they approved the tentative map because it did not connect to another public roadway. Kristin McQueary stated an irrevocable private easement would provide access to all the people that would buy those lots and have access to it and continued to protect the access rights of the other people in the neighborhood that had those access rights under Court cases. She noted in the Staff Report the item identified as PP-1 was an exhibit to a preceding court case which identified various easements throughout this area which was held by the neighbors. Kristin McQueary stated they had required references to PP-1 on the previous Parcel Map and would require reference PP-1 on this map. She encouraged them not to make an orphan public right of way where they have no ability to get to another public right of way. The Board discussed the alternative compliance and protection of the current property owners. Kristin McQueary understood that the Currivans, through the purchase of their property, obtained access rights through the private irrevocable roadways together with any other easements in the area. She believed the Currivan property was part of the court case which set out the PP-1 easement. She noted that pertaining to the road sloughing issues if it were a County road then the County would be liable to the extent of the tort cap for any damages to their property. She did not know where NDEP looked at on that roadway. She did not recommend that they approve a public right of way that did not adjoin another public right of way. Because of the unique configuration of access to this property, she encouraged approval of the alternate compliance; if they approve the tentative map. Commissioner Eklund-Brown noted that this went to court several times and they were not going to make everybody in the room happy. She believed they should follow the letter of the law. Theresa Currivan stated they planned to maintain public safety. She informed them that she was a nurse. She stated when the road was completed for the final map it would be proper. She noted Richard Katsma of High Mark

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 26 Construction who built the road was present at the meeting and he was aware of what needed to be done in the sloughing areas. She noted that the construction company had started to dump the dirt for the second season. Theresa Currivan stated when they come for the final map the road would be completed and every emergency vehicle would be able to go up there. She stated they planned to grade it and have a site for the storage of a tractor. She commented that they have a ten-seat snow cat if there was ever a time. However, they planned for everyone to be able to go up that road. She noted hunters were in the area last winter traveling through six and seven inches of snow in their four wheel drives. Theresa Currivan stated that they, as the developers, were concerned about the health and safety. She noted the Jones moved in after the development was started. She stated they moved into Mr. Beneto’s home which was in a wooded area along Ackler Creek. She felt that if the Jones were concerned about a fire they would have not moved there. Theresa Currivan noted they had a fire on their property; 1,500 acres of their property were burned in the 1995 fire. She reported they had reseeded it and it had grown back even better for Marty’s cattle. The board discussed the health, safety and welfare issues being looked at strongly during the next process; if it was appealed again from the Planning Commission. MOTION: Commissioner Eklund-Brown restated her motion to overrule the action of the Elko County Planning Commission and approve the tentative map for division into large parcels submitted by James and Theresa Currivan with contingencies of Staff Comments and Conditions dated February 15, 2007 of items 6-A through 6-M, inclusive of alternative compliance. Commissioner Myers seconded the motion. Commissioner Ellison asked if the percentage of development could be changed which would require them to form a homeowners’ association for road maintenance issues. Randy Brown stated he could ask the Currivans if they would consider that. He believed that previously he had asked for forty percent from the Currivans. He could bring this up in discussion during the filing of the final plat. He would also bring up the maintenance issue prior to the sale and the creation of the homeowners’ association. Commissioner Russell inquired if they could postpone contiguous development until a homeowners’ association was established. He felt that further development could occur in that area at the same time without having a homeowners’ association established. Randy Brown stated he and Kristin McQueary would look into the laws on that. Commissioner Eklund- Brown noted if a second parcel map was developed then the second access would be required.

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 27 Kristin McQueary stated the Legislature had set forth broad parameters on what they could control in parcel maps. She encouraged them to talk to their legislators about changing this law. The motion was passed unanimously. Jim Wachtel discussed previous comments made by one of the developers about the safety on the road.

The meeting was recessed at 5:35 p.m. and reconvened at 5:41 p.m.

X. NEVADA DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (NDEP): Big Ledge Barite Mine Project: A. NDEP Water Pollution Control Permit: Discussion and consideration of comments regarding NDEP approval of a Water Pollution Control Permit for the Spirit Minerals, LP project to mine barite at the Big Ledge Mine site located north of Wells, Nevada and all other matters related thereto. MOTION: Commissioner Eklund-Brown moved to send a letter of support for NDEP’s approval of a Water Pollution Control Permit for the Spirit Minerals, LP project at the Big Ledge Mine site. Commissioner Myers seconded the motion. Commissioner Eklund-Brown noted that they would be dewatering but they would be re-introducing the water back into the basin. Commissioner Nannini stated they were trying to comply with all the regulations. Terral Young, project manager for Spirit Minerals, reported they had done all of their environmental studies and filed for their permit applications. He stated this was an existing mine but it would be reclaimed after they were done. The motion was passed unanimously. B. NDEP Reclamation Permit: Discussion and consideration of comments regarding NDEP approval of a Reclamation Permit for the Spirit Minerals, LP project to mine barite at the Big Ledge Mine site located north of Wells, Nevada and all other matters related thereto. MOTION: Commissioner Nannini moved to send a letter of support for NDEP approval of the Reclamation Permit for the Spirit Minerals, LP project at the Big Ledge Mine site. Commissioner Myers seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.

XV. ELKO COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION:

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 28 A. Discussion and consideration of the approval of a Roadway Dedication for Wild Horse Land Company, LLC located in Sec. 23, T.36 N, R.54 E., M.D.B.&M. Commissioner Eklund-Brown asked if this was another extension. Randy Brown replied it was and there would be one more parcel map filed. He noted there would be a complete loop. He stated Dixie Drive was originally oversized at 36 foot width because the Nevada Division of Transportation would not grant the second access. MOTION: Commissioner Myers moved to approve the roadway dedication for Wild Horse Land Company, LLC located in Section 27, T.36 N, R. 54 E., M.D.B&M. Commissioner Nannini seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.

B. Discussion and consideration of the approval of a Roadway Dedication for Pacific Funding Corporation, Robert C. Mathwig & Kristi A. Mathwig and Charles Richardson Amended and Restated Trust located in Sec. 27 & 28, T.33 N, R.58 E., M.D.B.&M. Randy Brown explained this was a roadway to Joe Royer’s place up on Elk Mountain. He stated this was an extension of Country Lane and was offered to develop to a 26 foot standard. He stated that basically these properties were previously developed by long time deeds. He stated that they met all requirements and staff recommended approval. Commissioner Nannini asked if they would develop that area. Randy Brown stated parcel number two had already been developed. He believed this parcel would be further developed. He stated staff recommended acceptance of the roads for dedication for public purposes but not for maintenance. MOTION: Commissioner Myers moved to approve the roadway dedication for Pacific Funding Corporation, Robert C. Mathwig & Kristi A. Mathwig and Charles Richardson Amended and Restated Trust located in Sec. 27 & 28, T.33 N, R.58 E., M.D.B.&M. Commissioner Eklund-Brown seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.

XI. UNITED STATES BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT: A. Elko Field Office: Discussion and consideration of comments regarding livestock grazing as outlined in the Hubbard Vineyard Allotment Evaluation and all other matters related, thereto. MOTION: Commissioner Eklund-Brown moved to approve the

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 29 Hubbard Vineyard Allotment Evaluation. Commissioner Myers seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.

B. Battle Mountain Field Office: Discussion and consideration of comments regarding seed harvesting activities in the Elko and Battle Mountain Field Office areas and all other matters related, thereto. Commissioner Eklund-Brown noted this was about harvesting seed for the reseeding efforts for rehabilitation. MOTION: Commissioner Nannini moved to send a letter of support for the seed harvesting activities. Commissioner Myers seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.

C. Jarbidge Field Office, Idaho: Discussion and consideration of renewal of the Memorandum of Understanding designating Elko County as a Cooperating Agency in the RMP/EIS planning process on the Jarbidge Field Office area and all other matters related, thereto. Commissioner Eklund-Brown stated this was a renewal of their MOU with them from last year. She voiced concern that the County was jurisdictional but that was not stated along with their special expertise. Commissioner Eklund- Brown requested that they modify the MOU. MOTION: Commissioner Eklund-Brown moved to renew the MOU as a cooperating agency in the RMP/EIS planning process in the Jarbidge Field Office with a request that Elko County also be included because of jurisdictional reasons. Commissioner Myers seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.

XII. ELKO COUNTY WATER RESOURCE ISSUES: Discussion and consideration of water resource management and water rights issues that may impact Elko County including possible discussion related to the Southern Nevada Water Authority pipeline project and the Central Nevada Regional Water Authority activities and issues. Commissioner Ellison noted on the Discovery Channel they had aired about the Southern Nevada water issues in Utah and Arizona. Commissioner Eklund- Brown noted it was becoming a national drought issue and water was becoming more prevalent in discussions because the Southeast was having a huge drought

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 30 issue. Commissioner Eklund-Brown had spoken to Joe Guild about a rumor of SNWA looking around Elko County to purchase some ranches. She noted that Joe Guild stated that they were not looking at Elko County and stand by their Resolution made with Elko County.

XIII. METROPOLIS IRRIGATION RESTORATION PROJECT: Update report on the Metropolis Irrigation Restoration Project that will make improvements to Metropolis Irrigation District structures including the Bishop Creek Dam and a new Recreation Facility consisting of road access, campsites, picnic tables and a dock on the Bishop Creek Reservoir. Commissioner Nannini stated they needed two more signatures.

XVIII. COMMISSION MEETING CALENDAR: November 7 & 8, 2007 -- 1:30 p.m. – Elko – Courthouse November 21, 2007 -- 1:30 p.m. – Elko – Courthouse December 7 & 8, 2007 -- 1:30 p.m. – Elko – Courthouse December 19, 2007 -- 1:30 p.m. – Elko – Courthouse All Times Pacific Time Robert Stokes suggested they not hold a mid month meeting in November and noted they could call a special meeting if needed. MOTION: Commissioner Eklund-Brown moved to approve the commission meeting calendar with the November 21 meeting date still being discretionary. Commissioner Myers seconded the motion. The motion was passed by majority vote.

XX. CONSENT AGENDA: A. Presentation and review of claims for approval B. Review and approval of travel requests that may be pending. C. Approval of Minutes: September 5, 2007: 1. Board of County Commissioners 2. Board of County Highway Commissioners September 19, 2007: 1. Board of County Commissioners 2. Board of County Highway Commissioners 3. Town of Jackpot 4. Town of Montello D. Human Services Department: Approval of step increases for Sheriff’s Employee Association

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 31 Bargaining Unit, effective October 2007—Vallerie Steinfeld MOTION: Commissioner Eklund-Brown moved to approve the consent agenda with minute corrections submitted by myself and anyone else. Commissioners Myers, Nannini, Russell seconded the motion. The motion was passed by majority vote.

XVII. NORTHEASTERN NEVADA REGIONAL RAILPORT: Discussion and consideration of issues related to the Northeastern Nevada Regional Railport including options with regard to the development, operation and management of the Railport and Industrial Park. Possible issues for discussion and action may include Committee recommendations with regard to the lease, sale or contracting out of all or portions of the Railport and/or Industrial Park along with potential recommendations for contracting with consultants for various components of this project and all other matters related, thereto. Commissioner Ellison departed from the meeting room at 6:00 p.m. due to a conflict of interest. Commissioner Eklund-Brown noted they were waiting on the appraisal and the sale to Pacific Steel was a comparable sale for a valid appraisal. She commented that Elaine Barkdull had several buyers interested in making an offer. Commissioner Myers noted they had two appraisals pending but they should be done this week. He stated a company was interested in the hillside but felt they should keep it for their own fill. Commissioner Eklund-Brown noted that the hill was not Type 2 gravel. She stated they were working with NDOT to get a public crossing for a secondary access to the back property. She noted they were working with TranSystems on the plan. They had adjusted engineering costs and were doing it in phases. She stated they were doing it within their means. Commissioner Eklund-Brown commented that Paul Bottari had listed 650 acres for sale in that area. Commissioner Nannini inquired if High Mark was developing in that area. Paul Bottari stated there was property from the Ryndon RV Park back toward and adjoining the railport available. He stated there was approximately 160 acres of BLM property behind Brad Roberts’ home. He felt that it was good industrial property sites as well. XIX. CORRESPONDENCE, ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND NOTICES: Discussion of correspondence and notices received by the Commission inclusive of assignment of issues to future agendas for Commission action. No discussion was held.

XXI. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND COUNTY STAFF COMMENTS:

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 32 Commissioner Myers noted the Veterans Day Parade would be held on Saturday, November 10th. Commissioner Eklund-Brown reported the ECEDA dinner would be held on November 2nd and reminded them of the Farm Bureau invitation. Robert Stokes noted there would be an RTC meeting on the Spring Creek intersection issues scheduled this Saturday at 4:00 p.m.

XXII. ADJOURNMENT:

MOTION: Commissioner Myers moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Eklund-Brown seconded the motion. The motion was passed by majority vote.

There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned.

APPROVED JOHN ELLISON, Chairman

ATTEST: MARILYN TIPTON, Deputy Clerk

ELKO COUNTY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 17, 2007 PAGE 33