MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF CHURCHILL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

City Council Chambers, 55 West Williams Avenue, Fallon, NV Fallon, Nevada June 7, 2012

CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Churchill County Board of Commissioners was called to order at 8:15 a.m. on the above date by Chairman Frey. PRESENT: Norm Frey, Chairman Carl Erquiaga, Commissioner Pete Olsen, Commissioner Craig Mingay, Deputy District Attorney Bjorn Selinder, Interim County Manager Alan Kalt, Comptroller Kelly G. Helton, Clerk of the Board Pamela D. Moore, Deputy Clerk ofthe Board ABSENT: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by the board and public. VERIFICATION OF POSTING OF AGENDA It was verified by Deputy Clerk Moore that the Agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with NRS 241. ACTION ITEMS AGENDA Commissioner Erquiaga made a motion to approve the Agenda as submitted. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. MINUTES Commissioner Olsen made a motion to approve the Minutes of the regular meeting held on February 15, 2012 as submitted. Commissioner Erquiaga seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chairman Frey inquired ifthere were any public comments on issues that were not listed on the agenda. Don Mello said Bango Oil has not gotten any better with regard to the odor. The residents who live on the Carson Highway are very concerned that the county has either forgotten about them or has not listened to their concerns. The Bango Oil odor has gotten worse. To date, there have been about 3,000 reports of the noxious odor reported to the Planning Department from the Carson Highway and the Reno Highway. The residents are concerned about the long-term health issues, even though the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection (NDEP) and the county have said there are no health concerns out there. Years ago, the government said that about asbestos, cigarette smoking, silicone injections, and the atomic blast with radiation fallout. The latest was the DDT that you can't use anymore. He really thinks that the county is gambling with their lives out there. He knows the board does not think so but he believes that is what is going on. Since 2007, when Bango became operational, he has reported the oil slick that you could actually see on the Carson River, which is the river that supplies 99% of the water to our valley, other than the Swingle Bench area and some of the area

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 1 near Lahontan Dam. Also, he reported that there were oil films on the willows and you could actually walk down and smell and feel the oil on the willows along the river. He reported that to NDEP, the county, and to anybody that would listen. Not a single person ever showed up to even look at it- not one person. That really concerns him. Not one person even thought it was important enough to even come out to look. Some of his real concerns right now include the potential contamination to the farming community because, if the water is contaminated with the oil, what happens downstream? All three board members are farmers and they should be just as concerned or more concerned because that is their livelihood. As he said, nobody thinks anything about this fact. What would happen with the dry milk factory if the Churchill County valley does get contaminated and condemned or whatever else happens? It has been over five years of living with this noxious odor and it hasn't gotten any better. They have been promised that Bango Oil is going to fix things and have been asked to wait, to wait, to wait but it is worse now than it ever has been. The odor is just as bad. No one knows, including the board, what is going to happen with Bango Oil when they go to 62,000 gallons per day. Right now they are at 22,000 gallons per day. If you want to believe Glen Miller, the Professor at the University of Nevada Reno, he says that, as production increases, the area of contaminated odor will increase, as well. Over the past five years, the residents have been living with burning eyes, bloody noses, respiratory problems, headaches, nausea, and they are tired of this issue. He knows the board is not going to do anything but he is going to keep coming and keep talking about this issue until something happens. Chairman Frey thanked him and stated that he has made some ofthose 3,000 calls. He has called in himself when he smelled the odor. The board cannot take any action on this today. He thinks the county has gone as far as the law will allow us to go. Beyond that, it becomes a litigation issue. He asked if there were any further public comments on items not on the Agenda today but there were none. APPOINTMENTS THE BOARD MAY REQUIRE THE PROVISION OF AN OATH OR AFFIRMATION BY ANY PERSON PROVIDING ORAL TESTIMONY AT A PUBLIC HEARING. 8:15 a.m. Public Hearing - Consideration and possible action re: Zone change application from RMS Development LLC, Agent for Geothermal Resources Industrial Park LLC, to change from RR-20 Rural Resource District to I-Industrial on a parcel located northwest of Hazen, APN: 009-251-11, consisting of approximately 640 acres of non-water righted acres, Eleanor Lockwood, Planning Director. Planning Director Lockwood reported that a copy of the application and a copy of the Planning Commission Minutes were attached to the Agenda Report. Section 16. 08. 080 ofthe Churchill County Code states: I. Before a zoning map amendment may be recommended for approval, the applicant shall provide evidence to the commission and board concerning the physical use ofland and zoning currently existing in the general vicinity, and which have occurred in the previous jive (5) year time period, and describe: a. How growth and/or other development factors in the community support a change in the land use. b. The change in land use represents orderly development and that adequate services and infrastructure to support the proposed land use are available in the area. c. The change in zoning provides for an appropriate use ofthe land.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 2 d. The proposed zoning is in substantial conformance with the master plan and other adopted plans and policies. e. The proposed zoning and project is sensitive to and compatible with the use and development ofthe adjacent properties. 2. The commission, in forwarding a recommendation to the board for approval of a zoning map amendment or consolidated development code amendment shall make the following findings offact: a. That the proposed amendment is in substantial compliance with and supports the goals and policies ofthe master plan; b. That the proposed amendment will provide for land uses compatible with existing adjacent land uses and will not have detrimental impacts to other properties in the vicinity; c. That the proposed amendment will not negatively impact existing or planned public services or facilities and will not adversely impact the public health, safety and welfare. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed zone change application at its regular meeting May 9, 2012. As noted in the Minutes, the primary concern raised by the public was impact of traffic from heavy industrial uses, particularly safety issues on the Reno Highway. The Planning Commission responded that traffic issues will be addressed as necessary when development occurs in the area. The Planning Commission determined that the application and testimony provided by the applicant supported the findings of fact and unanimously recommended approval of the zone change from RR-20 to !-Industrial for APN 009-251-11. Mr. Rob Skinner, who represents RMS Development, is here if the board has any questions. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment but there was none. He said that he hopes our Special Use Permit process is strong enough because one of our first uses of it was the Bango Oil facility and he always questions whether it is strong enough to get people to do what we need them to do. He noticed there was a lengthy board action but it seemed that, perhaps, only the last sentence is all that is needed. He asked for a determination by counsel. Civil Deputy District Attorney Mingay said that is acceptable as long as the board acknowledges that they can make those findings. Commissioner Erquiaga made a motion to approve the zone change from RR-20 to !-Industrial for Assessor's Parcel Number 009-251-11. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. 8:20a.m. Consideration and possible action re: Bureau of Land Management's proposed supplemental rules to protect the area's natural and cultural resources and provide for the public health and safety on public lands, Mike Maquart, Bureau o(Land Management. Mike Maquart, Chief State Ranger for the Nevada Law Enforcement Program with BLM, introduced himself and Scott Fisher, District Law Enforcement Officer for the Carson City District. Mr. Marquart reported that BLM's proposed supplemental rules are designed to protect the area's natural and cultural resources and to provide for public health and safety on public lands. The authority for such rules is from the Constitution. Congressional action was taken with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, which granted authority to the Secretary of the Interior to promulgate rules and regulations for governing lands. 43 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 8365.1-6 states that the State Director may establish such rules as deemed necessary for the protection of a person, property, and public lands and resources.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 3 Authority and jurisdiction are tied to public lands. The process consists of the following elements: • Outreach/education. • Rules being posted at the local BLM Office. • Rules posted near and/or on the lands, sites, or facilities affected. • Rules will be posted in the Federal Register. • Rules will be published in a local newspaper of general circulation (Winnemucca newspaper) or made available by another means. A similar attempt was made in 2004 but the roll-out or outreach with the County Sheriff and Commissioners was not done. Many of the rules of conduct that BLM has in place on public lands were developed about 25-30 years ago but the BLM did not have Rangers at that time. The use of public lands has evolved and changed as follows: • Impact (use/urban interface). • Mexican Cartel Marijuana growth. • Drugs and alcohol playing a significant role. • Increased other safety issues. Many of the rules are antiquated and conflict with state regulations. BLM seeks to revise the federal regulatory framework so they are in line with state laws. This will enhance consistency between the state and federal officers and public, which is pertinent to a rural environment. Mr. Marquart said one of the myths they face is that they are enforcing state law or that they possess state authority, which is not true. Another is that they will be issuing state or county citations. Yet another is that there will be a significant increase in arrests but those things are not true. The Winnemucca District has had about 5 arrests in a 10 year timeframe. Another myth they hear is that the feds are taking over and that they are trying to elevate federal law over state law. Other myths include the following: • Rules make substantive changes to the law enforcement relationship. • Rules will lead to conflicts with the state, local, or county authorities but such overlap exists in many cases, such as: littering, assault, DUI, damage to property, drugs, seat belt violations, battery, and others). • Enforcing rules on county roads or highways. The proposed rules relate to the following areas: disorderly conduct, fireworks, alcohol, drugs, wastewater, vehicles, and trailers. Current BLM rules relate to: creating a hazard or a nuisance, fireworks, DUI, drugs, wastewater (black water), vehicles, and trailers. The operation of an off-road motor vehicle on public lands, while under the influence of alcohol, narcotics, or dangerous drugs is prohibited (any motorized vehicle). However, BLM alcohol regulations do not address areas, such as: open container, .08 alcohol level, contributing to a minor, failure or refusal to provide a sample, or recognizing fundamental testing procedures. BLM rules pertaining to conduct are not specific, such as creating a hazard and a nuisance versus disorderly conduct verbiage. BLM rules pertaining to drugs addresses possession or cultivation but not drug paraphernalia. Rules related to fireworks conflict with county rules or ordinances. BLM rules address dumping of sewage (black water) but not gray water. Vehicles and trailers must be maintained to the standards of state, federal, and local laws but there are conflicts because federal laws require an operator's license for off-highway vehicle use but state law does not; state law requires off-highway vehicle registration but federal law does not; and state law requires users of off-highway vehicles to wear a helmet but federal law does not.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 4 Mr. Marquart said he has been in conversation with the Sheriffs from Humboldt, Pershing, Washoe, Lyon, and Churchill Counties and has done a lot of outreach and solicitation of comments from them in this regard. This is also part of that outreach process. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment. Bob Clifford asked what the status is of the new regulations- are they drafted or just an idea? Mr. Marquart said he shared the draft with the Sheriff and has copy a here today. Mr. Clifford asked how long those regulations are or how many pages they are versus how long were the prior regulations. Mr. Marquart said he cannot attest to the prior regulations because it was before he got to this position. Mr. Clifford asked if he is stating that he has not read the prior regulations. Mr. Marquart said no but he thinks the new regulations are 6-7 pages. Chairman Frey asked him to submit a copy to the board. Mr. Clifford said the authority cited is for creating rules and regulations. There is a whole lot of controversy in this country about whether any authority has been granted for law enforcement to agencies like BLM. He would like the District Attorney to rule on that. He thinks we need to give serious thought to what degree we have an MOU allowing law enforcement with armed rangers in our county from the federal government. Ed Martinez, who lives on Bon Accord, said we can't afford the expense as the country is deep in debt already. If you have been watching the news, you know that the country is $15 trillion in debt and our state is not in much better shape than the federal government is in, given we are at about 15% unemployment now. Can we afford to spend money on a project when we have other more important things to do? People's lives are at stake here. If we take the money away from the people and we put it on a project that we think is important, although it may be to some degree, we must remember that people's lives are more important. Adding just another project at this time is just another expense and burden on the backs of the people. He can't imagine why controlling the people takes precedence over their lives. It seems that the tail is wagging the dog in an attempt to force the camel' s nose under the tent another time. DA Mallory said he is here today in a duel capacity as the Churchill County District Attorney and a member of the public. He was involved in the 2004 process when it was mistakenly or falsely, depending upon your point of view, represented that the counties had agreed to certain rules and regulations when, in fact, the counties had not. They were able to prevent those rules and regulations from going through. He urged, first of all, that the Commission make it very clear that the board is not approving any regulations at this time. The board can certainly take them into consideration if they would like, but they are not approving them. Secondly, from his prosecutor's point of view, we have plenty oflaws, we enforce those laws, and we haven't seen a tremendous rampage of lawlessness on the public lands here in Churchill County. The need for additional laws seems somewhat bothersome to many of us in law enforcement and in the public. He simply asked that the Commission consider that when they go through their consideration. Certainly, he suggested that the board send it to his office and they will give it some real good consideration, as well. Chairman Frey said he believes that the Sheriff is the chief law enforcement officer in Churchill County and any law enforcement that the BLM would undertake would be worked out through him. He has seen and heard of reliable cases where federal rangers with guns had billboards around here not long ago of a federal ranger pointing a gun, presumably loaded, at one of our citizens. Those things scare him. Sometimes your presence on federal lands with the citizens in the rural west, as he knows them, can actually escalate an issue of simple littering to somebody getting shot. He would hate to see that happen. He urged the board to make sure that all of the agreements are vetted out with the Sheriff and District Attorney before we move

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 5 forward. Churchill County's Master Plan backs that up and recognizes our Sheriff as the chief law enforcement agent for Churchill County. We can't have 20 law enforcement agents running around here. The state wants to have rangers and BLM wants to have rangers. He agrees greatly with Mr. Clifford in that what Mr. Marquart showed us today shows that they have authority to promulgate regulations and rules but he did not see anything that shows that they have authority to enforce those rules and regulations. In his mind, states are sovereign and he wants to hold onto that sovereignty. Federal government consistently wants to infringe upon state water law and other areas of our lives, but he has not been convinced yet. He appreciates the fact that BLM has come here to talk to us but this is listed as an informational item only, so the board has no authority to provide any backing of these regulations. The board would like to have a copy so that they can know what is being proposed. He was part of this discussion in 2004 and became knowledgeable of the attempt to have law enforcement on publically-managed lands through NACO. He worked with our then Sherifflngram and there were agreements made. We have been down this road before. He thinks the outcome was satisfactory at that point in time. Anything in this regard must go through our Sheriff and District Attorney. Commissioner Erquiaga agreed and stated that he thinks the idea that FLPMA is the authority to enforce rules is a reach. To him, a lot of these things look like probable cause to pull somebody over and harass them but he does not think that is necessary. He also thinks this will have an impact on our ranching and public land grazing. They now state that vehicles and trailers have to be maintained. There are times out on a ranch with public land leases where that is overkill and he does not think it is necessary. What kind of citations does the BLM issue? Are they misdemeanors or gross misdemeanors and how do they adjudicate those? Mr. Marquart said the process is that they issue a citation that is considered as a Class A Misdemeanor. If he issues a citation to somebody for littering or off-route, the person receives a copy and then must appear in Reno before the federal U.S. Magistrate Judge. Chairman Frey said it seems far­ reaching to him to throw this into the federal court system. Commissioner Erquiaga said he knows that has been the case in Forest Service lands in the past where they had to go before a Federal Magistrate. It became a deterrent more because it was such a pain-in-the-neck to get it taken care of. He doesn't agree with that. Mr. Marquart also mentioned the charge of off-route, so he asked if BLM has anything that defines "route" in this county? Mr. Marquart said it is part of their RMP process. They do have some closures at Sand Mountain due to the Blue Butterfly. Commissioner Erquiaga said Sand Mountain is a breed all its own, with a completely different use level and all of that. The county has an agreement with the Sheriffs Office that the Sheriffs Office will take care of law enforcement there. He is talking about the rest of the public lands out there. There are ways, there are 2 tracks, or all of those buzz words that are applied very loosely and he doesn't think there is a definition as to what BLM can enforce and what it cannot enforce. Mr. Marquart said he thinks they are in the process of revising the Resource Management Plan and he thinks one component of that is to create some additional clarity as to what that is. Sheriff Trotter said he has had communications with Mr. Marquart on this issue. He is not going to question his ability to make rules. However, when they did talk, his suggestion was that we use the Sheriffs Office to conduct law enforcement. First, that eliminates the need to go to Reno for federal court. We already have the ability to enforce any law or rule within the state or area in this county, except the Reservation. The Sheriff maintains jurisdiction. He has a good relationship with Mr. Marquart but he believes that Churchill County already has this covered and he is happy to keep this coverage.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 6 Commission Olsen said he would echo some of the other Commissioner's comments. He thinks there is a healthy suspicion of everything BLM does and some of that is based on fact and some of it is based on allegations of meetings on the RMP that have not been noticed well. He sees that BLM mentioned in the presentation that the rules would be published in the Winnemucca paper but not many people in Churchill County read that paper. Mr. Marquart apologized and stated that it would also be published in the local paper here too. Commissioner Olsen said he was very concerned about a meeting held in March about the RMP process where he was told, although he has not been able to confirm it, but people present at the meeting last month who were very certain and had been at the March meeting that was not noticed very well, although there were 6 Sierra Club members there and a handful of others who managed to know about it, but there were some wide-ranging changes being proposed for public lands in Churchill County. That brings a lot of concern from our people here who have enjoyed using our public lands and we want to continue to use them in the way that we have in the past. We do not appreciate any changes and would actually like to see some rollbacks on some of the defacto Wilderness Areas that have been put in place. Coming here with law enforcement challenges for us makes him encourage our District Attorney and Sheriff to push back and maintain control of our county and our citizens. Chairman Frey thanked the BLM representatives for coming to make a presentation today. 8:30 a.m. Consideration and possible action re: Appointment to the Sending Site Review Committee, Eleanor Lockwood, Planning Director. Planning Director Lockwood reported that Section 16.14.080(B) states that the Sending Site Review Committee's (SSRC) composition is as follows: "The Planning Director, or his/her designee, shall serve as the nonvoting chair. The Sending Site Review Committee will include three members appointed by the Board of County Commissioners. Members shall include a minimum of two agricultural representatives and one at large representative such as, but not limited to, agriculture, development, business, or real estate. Appointments will be three (3) year terms ...... " The SSRC currently includes John Mincer (farmer), Ray Hendrix (farmer), and Bob Getto (realtor). Ray Hendrix's term expires July 1, 2012. He has served two terms on the SSRC and wishes to step down. Gwen Washburn is interested in serving on the SSRC. Gwen's life­ long knowledge of the community, her involvement in and support of agriculture, and her knowledge ofthe TDR program, having been on the Board of County Commissioners and having participated in the program, will be a valuable asset to the SSRC. One correction needs to be made that the term will become effective on July 1, 2012 and expire June 30, 2015. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment but there was none. He thinks some of us are fairly familiar with Gwen and her past involvement with the TDR program, so he believes she is a very good candidate. Commissioner Erquiaga echoed that and said he can't think of any people who have more interest in seeing that program succeed. Commissioner Olsen agreed. Commissioner Olsen made a motion to appoint Gwen Washburn to the Sending Site Review Committee for a three year term commencing July 1, 2012 and ending June 30, 2015. Commissioner Erquiaga seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. 8:35 a.m. Consideration and possible action re: An Amended Division into Large Parcels Map for JoanN. Persinger, Trustee of the JoanN. Persinger Trust dated May 25, 2005 (TCID#12-002, Pasture Road) , Eleanor Lockwood, Planning Director.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 7 Planning Director Lockwood reported that the owner would like to divide APN 006-091- 58, a 197.5-acre parcel, into two parcels-one is 47.99 acres, and one is 149.51 acres. There is access to both parcels from Pasture Road. There is an eleven acre parcel to the west of the parcels to be divided that has been labeled "hiatus area" by the surveyor. The ownership of the 11 acres is in dispute and has, therefore, not been included on this map. It is strongly recommended to the landowner that the landowner initiate a quiet title action after the map is recorded in order to resolve the ownership issue. A copy of the Planning Commission Minutes were provided with the Agenda Report. The Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval of the map. Ms. Lockwood stated that, after this action was initiated, Mrs. Persinger unfortunately passed away but this parcel is titled in the JoanN. Persinger Trust. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment. Wayne Pressel said he is an attorney in Carson City and represents part of the family of Joan Persinger, Marta Spandau, the natural daughter of Joan Persinger and Frank William Cavateio, who is the grandson and Marta's son. There is another relative, who may be speaking here today, William Curt Persinger. That is the family involved with this matter. He is not here today to contest or object to the division. This certainly was Joan's long-term project, which he believes she was doing, in part, because she wanted to return this land to farming use. At 83 , she had decided that she needed to give it to other hands to do, which is very laudable. The other part of it was that she was hoping that the sale of land would pay for her house and set her up for life. Unfortunately, as reported, her life was much shorter. Again, he is not here to object but to say, in representing Marta Spandau and Frank William Cavateio, they will be filing a lawsuit this morning against the trust itself as a nominal defendant and William Curt Persinger personally, who is claiming that there is a trust and that he is the sole trustee. He has, at this point, refused to give them a copy or disclose any terms of any purported trust. The best evidence that he has that there is a trust is that there is a deed recorded with Churchill County saying that Joan gave this land to her trust, so he is assuming that there is some sort of trust. Whether it is valid and what its provisions are will be a matter of court contest as they file suit. As for the quiet title, to try to relieve any issues, probably sooner or later a quiet title action will need to be done, dealing with this now that Joan is gone. If no relatives will be moving onto the property, for the properties to be sold it will need a quiet title action on that 11 acres of hiatus in order to clean up matters. The other thing he would tell the Commissioners, as they are probably aware, is that LCL Farming and Development has opened escrow with Joan to sell the larger plot of undeveloped land on the right hand side, which is approximately 150 acres, as he understands it. He talked to the Chief Officer about disposition of that land but he thinks the plan is, and Joan's intention always was, to have the property divided. She intended to live on the portion of land on the left hand side and would sell to LCL Farming and Development the entire right hand side. That is still in process, escrow has been opened, but no closing date has yet been set. Lawsuit injunction will follow quickly in this matter. He imagines that, until this matter is resolved, the land will be tied up. He wanted to put that into the public record. If the board has any questions or directions for him, he is open to hearing what the board might have to say. Chairman Frey said his only question is whether there will be any liability created by approving this division today. Civil Deputy District Attorney Mingay replied that there would not be any liability, at this point. Planning Director Lockwood added that, with any division into large parcels, it must be recorded before June 15th or all taxes will be due upon recordation, which was one of the

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 8 reasons they were trying to push this through as quickly as possible. She understands that legal issues will take place, which is fine, but she wanted to put it on the record that if taxes are not to 1 be paid, then a map must be recorded by June 15 h. Chairman Frey asked, relative to that issue, since her demise, is there someone that would be presenting that for recordation. Ms. Lockwood said, normally, the Surveyor takes that responsibility upon himself. Normally, there is a contract between the Surveyor and the property owner and then the Surveyor, upon the board's approval, will then contact his client to move forward by recording the map. William Curt Persinger said he is son of Joan and brother of Marta Spandau. He has been named as the trustee of Joan's trust set up in 2003 ; he is the executor ofthat trust. As Planning Director Lockwood mentioned, the land is in the trust. As far as the lawsuit, that is a squabble between him and his sister and should not affect the board's decision for approval ofthis division of the parcel. He said he knows that his mother had been working on this for 20 months but, sadly, she passed away before it could finally reach this point to get the final approval. As far as the portion of the 11 acres requiring quiet title, he has employed Wayne Pederson to make application for that quiet title deed. He is not an attorney but he understands that he does not have to show the trust to everybody who might request it. It is a private document and no one needs to be shown it, unless they are entitled to it. His sister has visually seen the trust but the lawyer has not. Again, this is an internal squabble between him and his sister and it should not affect the board's decision for dividing the parcel. Chairman Frey asked if there was any further public comment but there was not. Commissioner Erquiaga asked, in relation to the 11 acres of hiatus land, who the discrepancy over ownership is with. Is it the neighbors to the side? Civil Deputy District Attorney Mingay said that is not the case and it goes back to the 1920s when those two parcels were divided. That hiatus is, on the record, actually owned by the original owner. He divided the two properties but the two legal descriptions did not match or meet up in the middle. He sold the parcel to the east to somebody and then the parcel to the west to somebody, which has since been subdivided. Back to 1920, that parcel (interrupted). Chairman Frey said those things were fairly common, given the fact that, in the past, a lot of the calculations were mathematical calculations done by hand where errors can occur. They billed with computer; we all know that (laughter). Mr. Mingay said the fence line has, actually, always included the Persinger property, so he does not think there is anybody claiming any interest in the land. Commissioner Erquiaga said, essentially, it sort of didn't exist until somebody measured it again and realized the error. Mr. Mingay said that is correct- when they decided to divide the property. Chairman Frey said the problem is that Commissioner Erquiaga's property has three of these on it. Commissioner Erquiaga said he has one with a water right issue. Chairman Frey said his main concern was whether any liability would be created by action today. Commissioner Erquiaga asked for clarification if that dividing line is a road, a physical feature, so there is a logical reason why we want to split this in this manner, which was answered affirmatively. Chairman Frey said the road across the bottom is Depp Road. Commissioner Olsen made a motion to approve the JoanN. Persinger Amended Division into Large Parcels map (TCID#l2-002, Pasture Road), subject to further information from the Building Department regarding septic systems and NAS Fallon AICUZ regulations; compliance with water right dedication ordinance; and compliance with Churchill County Code. Commissioner Erquiaga seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 9 8:40 a.m. Consideration and possible action re: Inclusion of Churchill County in a MOA with the Department of Nayy, Lahontan Valley Land and Water Alliance and Nevada Land Conservancy for the purpose of purchasing Conservation Easements around NAS Fallon, Eleanor Lockwood, Planning Director. Planning Director Lockwood reported that the current contract between the Department ofNavy, Lahontan Valley Land and Water Alliance (LVLWA), and the Nevada Land Conservancy (NLC) expires September 30, 2012, and the balance of funds cannot be rolled over to the next fiscal year. If Churchill County agrees to be part ofthis contract/agreement, the remaining balance of funds can be used by the Navy to purchase Conservation Easements included in the Navy/County Encroachment Partnering Agreement. Inclusion of Churchill County in the Agreement does not change the current cost-sharing agreement (75% Navy, 25% Churchill County) but will allow for this funding to be used towards our Encroachment Agreement currently in place. A copy of the modified contract was provided for review. She reported that there are slight modifications to the agreement where slight changes to the language have been made. For example, on page two, the original version read, "The parties agree to include Churchill County, a political subdivision of the State ofNevada, as an additional party to this Memorandum of Agreement for encroachment protection with the Department of Navy, Lahontan Valley Land and Water Alliance, and Nevada Land Conservancy". The final version reads, "The Department ofNavy, Lahontan Valley Land and Water Alliance, and Nevada Land Conservancy, collectively known as the parties, agree to include Churchill County, a political subdivision of the State ofNevada, as an additional party to the Memorandum". As you can see, there have been slight tweaks to the language but there is no substantial change in the content. The purpose of this is to bring more money to the table for the purpose of purchasing conservation easements. Chairman Frey asked if the motion would more correctly be made to approve or disapprove, with concurrence of the District Attorney. Ms. Lockwood said that would be good. However, what is provided as an attachment to the board is not what is signed. The formal agreement with this language will be presented to the Deputy District Attorney for his review. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment but there was none. Commissioner Erquiaga made a motion to approve the inclusion of Churchill County in a MOA/contract with the Department of Navy, Lahontan Valley Land and Water Alliance, and the Nevada Land Conservancy and to authorize the Interim County Manager to sign the contract, subject to concurrence of the District Attorney's Office. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. 8:45 a.m. Consideration and possible action re: Audit Engagement Letter from Kafoury Armstrong and Company related to the general Churchill County audit for this Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2012, Alan Kalt, Comptroller. Comptroller Kalt reported that the engagement letter from Kafoury Armstrong and Company to perform the audit for Churchill County for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2012 is provided for consideration. The engagement letter is prepared in accordance with accounting standards. As noted on page 9 of 10, there are two separate proposals for consideration. The first is that the gross fees for the audit, inclusive of the hours incurred to prepare the financial statements and related notes, will not exceed $77,000. The second option is that the gross fee for the audit, exclusive of the hours incurred to prepare the financial statements and related notes, will not exceed $63 ,000. Due to staffing and timing issues related to fiscal year end, the

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 10 Comptroller's Office recommends the proposal that is inclusive of the preparation ofthe financial statements and related notes and that was approved by the Audit Committee and their meeting held on May 29th. NRS 354 requires local governments to have an independent audit annually. The cost of the audit is based on several factors associated with the amount of time and complexity of performing the professional services required under Generally Accepted Auditing Standards. The amount for the audit has been included in the General Fund budget for FY 2013 under professional fees. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment but there was none. He stated, as part of the Audit Committee, that the committee did meet on the 29th and reviewed the letter. They were able to have a conversation with Kafoury Armstrong and Company and, thereafter, approved recommending this letter. Commissioner Olsen asked, in relation to the $63 ,000 for the audit portion, how big of a change is that from last year. Comptroller Kalt said their fees last year were about $79,000, so it, ultimately, will be a slight reduction. Commissioner Olsen said that is with the financial statements and Comptroller Kalt replied that is correct. Commissioner Olsen made a motion to approve the Audit Engagement Letter from Kafoury Armstrong and Company for Churchill County in the amount of $77,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2012, inclusive of the hours incurred to prepare the financial statements and related notes. Commissioner Erquiaga seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. 8:50 a.m. Consideration and possible action re: Audit Engagement Letter from Kafoury Armstrong and Company related to the CC Communications audit for this Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2012, Lorrie Ford, CC Communications. Lorrie Ford reported that the management of CC Communications provides for the board's consideration the engagement letters from Kafoury Armstrong and Company to perform the audit and compilation for CC Communications for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2012. The engagement letter is prepared in accordance with accounting standards. The fees for the audit, exclusive of the hours incurred to prepare the financial statements and related notes, will not exceed $59,700. The breakdown between the enterprise funds are CC Communications ­ Telephone at $34,800; CC Communications - Wireless at $7,000; CC Communications­ Broadband at $14,600; CC Communications- Long Distance at $3 ,300. The Audit Committee met on May 29, 2012 and recommended approval of the engagement letters. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment but there was none. Again, he stated that the Audit Committee had met and recommended these letters. Commissioner Olsen asked how this compares to last year. Ms. Ford said the fees are less because they will prepare their own financial statements. Last year, they did a parallel with Kafoury to see how they would do. It went well, so they will do their own this year. Commissioner Olsen asked if there is a Compilation Report for long distance. Comptroller Kalt said, given its size and complexity, although they are not required to have a complete audit, having the Compilation Report is a good internal control feature. He concurs that this report be done and feels it is important. Ms. Ford said that it does explain a little bit in the engagement letter what they will look at in the compilation review compared to an audit. Commissioner Erquiaga made a motion to approve the Audit Engagement Letters from Kafoury Armstrong and Company for CC Communications in

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 11 the amounts of: CC Communications- Telephone at $34,800; CC Communications- Wireless at $7,000; and CC Communications­ Broadband at $14,600. Further, to approve the Compilation Report for CC Communications -Long Distance, in the amount of $3,300 for fiscal year ending June 30, 2012. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. 8:55 a.m. Consideration and possible action re: Discussion and direction regarding adoption of an ordinance related to irresponsible dog owner law (not a leash law), Jim Rowley. Jim Rowley apologized to the board for not appearing at the last hearing when this was scheduled. He mistakenly thought the meeting was in the evening. He reported that, during the past 6 years, he has been subject to dog trespass resulting in dead livestock, unwarranted restraint orders, and numerous calls to and from the Churchill County Sherriff s Department, causing untold and unwarranted mental anguish, as well as financial loss. These problems are listed in brief but are just the tip of the iceberg and could have been prevented if a simple ordinance such as he presents today was adopted. This ordinance would allow a simple citation, with minimal financial cost to the perpetrator or just enough to get their attention on the first violation and which would subsequently increase with each violation. This, in itself, would serve as a deterrent to such activity. Mr. Rowley said he has been told that the Churchill County Sheriffs Deputies spent around 80% to 90% of their calls on dog related issues, which they can presently do nothing about, other than to act as an arbitrator to keep the peace. He personally experienced that, which did nothing to stop the problem for six years. With the simple citation system (similar to a misdemeanor citation), it would not only reduce or completely end the problems of this kind, it would also provide an income to the finances of the county. The Deputies would be freed to give more attention to more worthwhile situations. This is, in no way, a leash law but simply provides a way to immediately call to task the owners of dogs that create problems without the owner taking proper steps to contain them. Once a person receives a citation, there will be an option for them to actually appear in court. The person may pay the minimum amount he would face if going to court and forfeit said amount. Mr. Rowley provided a draft for the board's consideration, which he believes to be legally sufficient without major changes. Mr. Rowley said this would place the responsibility on the owner, where it should be, and not the dog. It provides a minimum fine or charge. He saw something on TV the other day where Las Vegas had a park and they went around and placed flags everywhere that the dogs had left their marks, which was amazing. Their fine was $200. Imagine if your dog left a little token and you were fined $200, you would be really mad. With this proposal, a dog owner would receive a citation requiring him to pay $50 for the first offense. That would make the owner think twice about it if it began to cost him money. Ifthe person is obstinate and does not take care of the problem, then the next fine would go up a little bit. If he gets a third offense, now you are talking about $1 ,000, with the provision that the Judge could even increase that amount. The problem would probably be eliminated before then because what he has in mind is that the Deputy who responds to this call could simply talk to both parties and give them both a copy of the ordinance, which would probably end the problem in 99% of the cases. Once this ordinance is established and the word got around, that would free the Deputies from having to respond to 80% to 90% of dog calls. Looking at this from a financial perspective, the Deputies would have more time to devote to problem areas and would result in having to not hire additional personnel.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 12 Personnel is the largest expense of any operation. He thinks that this little ordinance can save the county $40,000 to $50,000 easily. That amount is a lot of money. Not only that, it creates a situation where, if you have two neighbors having a problem, once they are presented with the ordinance, it may end the problem there. It doesn't create a $200 fine that makes them really mad. It also would help eliminate the problem of anti-neighbor relationships. It is not really a big deal but it gives the person with the problem dogs the option of a cage, a fence, a lease if he wants to, but it is not forcing them to do any of those things; it leaves him with the option to correct the problem as he sees fit. He had quite a problem with dogs in his own neighborhood and an action that the county took about something else pretty well eliminated that problem and he is happy with that. He is not asking that it be done retroactively. He would just like to see it done so that other people would not have to go through the same thing that he did for five and six years. He is sure that there are similar situations as this where this little simple ordinance would take care of the problem. He directed the board to page one, section 3, the third line, where it says: "and $1000 upon the third conviction" and asked that the "third conviction" be stricken because the way it is written does not provide for anything past a third conviction. He suggested it read: "upon any future conviction", which he believes would be more appropriate. On the next line below that he would like to change it to: "as minimum amounts, increasable by the court" because adjustable means up and down and, previously, he has shown these as minimum fines, so it should be increasable. He thinks the ordinance, other than those changes, stands on its own merits. He has not asked anyone to come in and speak for this because he thinks it stands on its own merits, both realistically and financially. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment. Michelle Atkinson, who lives at 1717 BellAire Lane, said she is Mr. Rowley's neighbor and it seems to be personal vendetta, in her opinion. It is her dogs that he is talking about. She has done everything that the county has asked her to do as far as putting up fences. She installed 6-8 foot fences between the properties. The previous fence that is there was done by her husband and Mr. Travis 35 years ago. She feels that the fence is her own. The fence that they put up since then is to keep her dogs out of his property. She has a Special Use Permit (SUP) in Churchill County to raise golden retrievers, which she has had for over 5 years now. In the last 3 years, she has operated a rescue and, in 2010, they were able to provide 412 dogs with new homes through the local shelter and other people bringing dogs to her or many of them dropping them off on the street once they found out that this is what she was doing. She applied for an SUP to operate the dog rescue, went to meetings about that for quite a few months before the Planning Commission, and finally pulled their application for the SUP for personal reasons, which does not have anything to do with Mr. Rowley or her neighbors. She lives on 5 acres and has also installed a 4 foot field fence on the ground, attached to the standing fence. The entire 5 acres is fenced and the entire 5 acres has this fence on the ground to keep the dogs from digging. The only problems that she has with her neighbor is the fact that he has shot onto her property and has shot at her dogs when they were on her property. She has documentation showing that he shot 4 dogs. They have had 8 dogs poisoned on her property, which were on her property; she has a bullet hole in her barn and the trajectory shows that the bullet came from her neighbor's property. She had a dog come up missing the first of this year and the dog has since been seen on his property. The Sheriffs Deputy went to his property about that but he claims that he got the dog from somebody else. She has probably about 50 people who know the dog belongs to her but she cannot get the dog back. Her neighbor is a problem to her. She is keeping her dogs in. The dogs that she has, that are not golden retrievers, are personal pets. There is no law in Churchill County about how

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 13 many personal pets a person can have or how many she can find homes for if she needs to. She feels that this is just a personal vendetta and she feels it is wrong. She thinks this whole thing should be looked at in that vein. She would like to keep doing what she is doing. She understands that she can't do the rescue part of it, which she has no problem with, and maybe that will be in her future. Chairman Frey thanked her for coming. Ms. Atkinson added that she had a paper with her, which was given to her by Sheriff Trotter months ago, that show dogs, cats, and birds are also considered livestock. Therefore, being that Nevada is an open range state, as she has been advised, any and all livestock shall be fenced out, so, if your cows get out and wander into Mr. Rowley' s property to eat his lawn, it is his responsibility to fence them out. Chairman Frey said his cows get out and go next door to eat Jeannie Nalls' roses. Ms. Atkinson said that would make it her business to fence them out and she feels it should be the same for the dogs. She has put up fences, at a cost of thousands of dollars, in an effort to maintain her dogs on her own property but they have an occasional escape. All of the other neighbors are nice enough to just call her and she takes care of it. She would like to continue doing what she is doing. If there is a problem on Mr. Rowley's behalf, then maybe he should install a better fence. Mr. Rowley said the board, obviously, saw the complete package he sent with the original meeting that was had. Chairman Frey said he wanted to make it clear that the board is not the court for neighbor disputes. Ms. Atkinson has had her piece to say, so he asked Mr. Rowley if there was anything that he wished to add to his recommended board action. Mr. Rowley said she fails to say that on May 1st her dogs came onto his property and killed 7 of his 10 ducks. That being said, he is still not intending for this to be retroactive. He is not trying to get back at her but, rather, if, in the future, she should fit these descriptions, then she is no better than anybody else and this would apply to her, as well. He is not asking that it be done retroactively. He is simply putting it forward so that anybody else who faces a situation that he has will have recourse. If it happens to fall where he needs to use it, which, hopefully, he will not, because the problem has literally disappeared except for the May 1st incident, then it will be up to the authorities. He is not asking that it be done retroactively but he would like to see it passed. Sheriff Trotter said he read Mr. Rowley's paperwork for a potential ordinance at the last meeting and did some research to verify the statistics. While he will not contest that animal issues are a problem for the Sheriffs Office, they are not 90% of their calls. They have much more significant calls than that. In 2011 , the Sheriffs Office had 685 animal calls, which amounts to about 10% oftheir call volume. They are on pace for 10% again because they have had 337 animal calls just at the Sheriffs Office. 10% is still a lot and they have numerous problems, although this situation is the most storied neighbor dispute with animal issues, but they have numerous other similar situations. They also have some that are not dog related. He had a lady call to complain that somebody's peacocks are going over her fence and tearing up her flowers. They have calls about peacock's squawking in the middle of the night and waking up the neighbors. They receive starving horses calls and calls about dead cows in the field. Animal issues are not limited to dog issues, although dogs are a significant portion of it. This particular case involves numerous restraining orders back and forth. They have had dozens of calls for this particular neighbor dispute. They have developed criminal cases, which have been forwarded to the District Attorney's Office but prosecution has not resulted from those cases. However, they have had some success with prosecuting another case based on two Nevada Revised Statutes, which are NRS 202.450 public nuisance and another for breach ofthe peace. Both of those statutes are vague. In August, in an attempt to take a proactive approach on animal issues and to

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 14 cut down on the number of calls, he asked his Deputies to try to build cases using those two statutes available to us since there is no County Code. Chairman Frey asked if he has found that it has reduced the number of calls. The Sheriff said it has not, as yet, but he believes it potentially will do so. They successfully prosecuted a barking dog call. They had had numerous calls to this house, the neighbor talked to the other neighbor about the dogs but he said he didn't care, the Sherifftalked to the neighbor but he didn't care, which resulted in them sending the case to the DA who prosecuted and got a conviction, resulting with this guy having a 6 month suspended sentence. They had a case of starving horses where a lady had allegedly buried about a dozen horses on her property because she was not feeding them. The DA was able to contact the lady and, under threat of duress, she now has fat horses and lots of feed for them. He has checked on the welfare of the horses himself. He is not adverse to having a county ordinance for responsible animal ownership. However, he thinks we need to try something else, which is why they are trying cases under those two statutes. He thinks it will take a little time. Most of the NRS applies to commercial operations but they did find a couple of vague statues that do not specifically say animals but it also does not specifically say not. He believes they have an obligation at the Sheriffs Office to defend people's right to peaceable living. If you have a dog barking at 1:00 a.m. when windows are open in the summer, they will respond and try to build a case on it and forward it to the DA. He does not believe the ordinance Mr. Rowley is proposing would help them any because it is only dog related. He thinks that we need to let the plan being done by the Sheriffs Office try to take form. He sent a reminder last week to his Deputies since he has a couple of new Deputies on the road to make sure that they are all on the same track. They are trying to use these two statutes to build a case and to find out if they do work. If they don't work in court, at that point he will come back to the board and ask for some teeth, pun intended. Chairman Frey asked if there was any further public comment but there was not. He said this issue pops up from time to time. He would like to give a shot at the Sheriffs plan with the nuisance statutes. He does not believe, with the way this proposed ordinance is written, that it will match up with our current ordinances in style or anything along those lines. Generally, it would have to be vetted out through the DA's Office to get something that would align with existing county ordinances. The federal government tries to legislate responsibility quite regularly and parents try to teach children responsibility, which comes with mixed success; but legislating responsibility never works, in his mind, even though government is forced to do so. He is not inclined to push this ordinance any further. He thinks we need to allow time for the Sheriffs plan to work. Commissioner Erquiaga said he thinks we should try the Sheriffs approach. We have been through this before on other issues where we need to consider if we need more laws or if we just need to find a way to enforce the ones we have. The Sheriff is working on one way to enforce this. He also thinks that any kind of an ordinance like this would require a lot of public input and there would be a lot of public reaction to it, so we certainly couldn't do it today. Commissioner Olsen said he is not inclined, at this time, to act on this. He would hope that the plan that the Sheriff and DA are currently pursing would give satisfaction to some folks who have had problems in the past. He knows they are working towards that right now. It is not a quick process. As Norm said, you can't legislate good behavior and, if you have a neighbor that is a problem, it is tough to make them do anything without using the force of the law, which is a long process and that is what the Sheriff is going through now. He would encourage that we just continue down that road and see if we get satisfaction.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 15 Chairman Frey said he will continue to have his nightmares of having one of his bovines get over on Dr. Murray's pool cover. It scares him to death thinking about how he would get a cow out of somebody's swimming pool in the middle of the night. He thanked Mr. Rowley for his interest and thanked both of them for coming down. He thinks they need to have a picnic lunch some day to talk about anything but dogs. That worked for him with Harry Reid on the water issue. They don't talk about water but it resolved an issue and many issues have been resolved since they made that agreement. They might find that they can be good neighbors on a different level. He asked the board if there was any desire for a motion but there was none. The recommended board action died for lack of a motion. LETTERS RECEIVED: Consideration and possible action re: Bureau of Land Management notification of plans to revise its existing Resource Management Plan and nomination of areas of environmental concern within the Carson City District. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) provides notification of plans to revise its existing Resource Management Plan and nomination of areas of environmental concern (ACEC) within the Carson City District. If Churchill County is interested in nominating areas in the Carson City District as an ACEC, they ask that we provide as much information as possible along with the nomination. The following information will help their interdisciplinary team evaluate the nominations: • Name and location of nominated area (legal land description, if possible). • Map of nominated ACEC area with well-defined boundaries. • Reason or basis for nomination. Include why we believe the area is important and relevant (see fact sheet for definition of importance and relevance). • Any reference material or web addresses where they can obtain additional information or data about the area that is being nominated. All nominations are due by July 1, 2012 to: BLM NV CCDO [email protected] or my bail to: Bureau of Land Management, 5665 Morgan Mill Road, Carson City, NV 89701 . Questions can be directed to Colleen Sievers, Project Manager, at 775-885-6000 or by e-mail: csievers@blm. gov. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment but there was none. Commissioner Olsen said he wonders if we shouldn't have some response, not necessarily outlining a particular area but a general statement from all of the land use planning that we did last year. He knows that Commissioner Erquiaga was right in the middle of that and they spent many, many hours doing that. It might behoove the county to draft a letter of our stand on minimizing the encroachment of BLM, new ordinances, or walling off land and that sort of thing that seems to be the general consensus of our community, that those sorts of ideas could be conveyed in that letter as it pertains to this particular process. We could also ask to be notified of any other group that puts forth an idea for some of these areas. He would also like to have Commissioner Erquiaga's input on it because he is the one who did so much work last year. Commissioner Erquiaga said he thinks some response would be a good idea. These things bring a whole lot of regulation with them. They are not wilderness, they are not de facto wilderness, but they shouldn't be taken lightly. Perhaps BJ Selinder and Eleanor Lockwood could work on that response. Chairman Frey suggested that we work on that and let them know where we are at with our Master Plan and those kinds of things. He thinks we have the tools laid out to submit and request that we be kept abreast of any applications for these lands of environmental concern.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 16 They keep coming up with new classes, which is scary every time they come up with a new classification. We know where wilderness study areas have taken us. Commissioner Erquiaga said he doesn't believe that Churchill County has any designation right now but he knows that there is one in Nye County, south of Gabbs, which is out of our area but it still needs to be looked at. Coordination is the right "c" word. Chairman Frey said he believes they use consultation and coordination, which we have taken up in our Master Plan. Commissioner Olsen said coordination means something different to them than it does to us. Commissioner Erquiaga said coordination has a very clear definition. Interim County Manager Selinder said he notes that the comments are due by July 1, so he assumes that, if they work with Commissioner Erquiaga, staff can put together an appropriate response and get it out before that date. Commissioner Erquiaga said he was not clear about what the board's action was proposed to be. No action was taken other than to direct a response be prepared. They are not asking us to nominate areas but they are asking us for input on their plans to revise existing lands. He is not really clear but, perhaps, they can figure that out. Chairman Frey said he believes this is part of their notification process. OLD BUSINESS: Consideration and possible action re: Agreement between Public Policy Innovations, LLC and the Board of County Commissioners for Professional Services of Interim Churchill County Manager, Bjorn Selinder. District Attorney Art Mallory reported that the Interim Churchill County Manager, Bjorn Selinder, shall perform the professional services as described in Interim County Manager Specification attached to the Agreement as Exhibit A. Bjorn Selinder shall devote such time as may be required to successfully perform the duties of Interim County Manager. The duration of the Agreement shall not extend beyond 120 days, unless extended by mutual agreement and in writing under similar terms and conditions. Churchill County shall pay Bjorn Selinder a fee of $10,460.00 per month, payable in bi-monthly increments of$5,230.00. All expenses, including travel, which have been pre-approved by the County Comptroller, shall be assumed by Churchill County and paid directly by Churchill County upon presentation of satisfactory supporting documentation. Bjorn Selinder may be allowed the use of a county vehicle in performance of county business but, in the event that Bjorn Selinder is required to use his own vehicle in the conduct of county business, mileage shall be reimbursed to Bjorn Selinder at the prevailing federal rate per mile traveled. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment but there was none. Commissioner Erquiaga made a motion to approve the Agreement between Public Policy Innovations, LLC and the Board of County Commissioners for Professional Services of Interim Churchill County Manager, Bjorn Selinder. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. District Attorney Mallory said the county has entered into the contract nunc pro tunc, which means we are passing it now for then. This is a legal concept that is perfectly acceptable. We entered into the contract with the understanding that this would become the contract. Consideration and possible action re: Approval of Job Description for County Manager and the recruitment and selection process for the position. Human Resources Director Stark reported that, on May 24, 2012, the Board of County Commissioners conducted a public workshop regarding the job description for the County Manager and the recruitment process for the position. As a result of the workshop, Human Resources Director Geof Stark was tasked with incorporating suggested changes into the job

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 17 description and was directed to bring the modified job description before the board for approval at their June 7, 2012, meeting. The proposed job description is the resulting document. Board and public comment is still invited. In addition, Mr. Stark was also directed to consider questions to be asked as part of a supplemental questionnaire to be filled out by the candidates. Input from the board and the public also encouraged the recruitment process to be limited to the "Great Basin" region (rural Nevada, Eastern Oregon, Eastern Washington, Utah, Idaho, etc.), rather than a national recruitment. The supplemental questionnaire should aid in recruiting individuals who may come from this region. Mr. Stark has also developed a recruitment timeline, which will be modified, submitted, and discussed by the board. Mr. Stark is aiming for a hiring date around mid-September of2012. Much of the recruitment will be handled via online postings. Applicants will be directed to submit their resumes, cover letters, and supplemental questionnaire answers electronically. At this time, staff recommends a committee be formed to evaluate applications objectively and determine interview candidates based on objective criteria. The board, if it desires, may direct the Interim County Manager to appoint said committee. The fiscal impact is expected to be up to $10,000 for recruitment. Advertising will cost approximately $3 ,000. Remaining recruitment costs may include travel costs for interviews (if the board opts to pay for those costs) and partial relocation costs, if applicable (if the board opts to help pay for those costs). Funding would need to come from the General Fund. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment but there was none. He stated that, in general, as a result of his reading of the changes, a lot of the comments from the public and board were incorporated into this, such as 8 years of governmental administrative experience, negotiating contracts, communication between the County Manager and Commissioners, the deal with possession of a Nevada Driver's License being downgraded to having a license or an alternative method of travel, and things such as that. HR Director Stark said he tried to incorporate those things that he heard. One of the things he was going to modify, but which he sees he failed to do, is under experience where it says "8 years of experience in business administration and/or local government administration". There was discussion about whether we wanted that to be local government or just government administration. He was going to strike the word "local" because someone may have governmental experience but it may not, necessarily, be with local government. He thinks that would be a viable commodity or trait to have. With the board's permission, he would strike the word "local". Interim County Manager Selinder said he believes that we also discussed a qualifier that would further describe that as local government experience as highly desirable. You could say governmental experience but then throw in the qualifier that local governmental experience is highly desirable. Chairman Frey said his copy does state that it is desirable. HR Director Stark said we could change that to "highly desirable" if the board prefers. Commissioner Olsen said that, on the bottom of the first page, it says "performs other related duties as assigned". Chairman Frey said he thinks that is included at the very beginning of distinguishing characteristics. HR Director Stark said that is correct and also under essential job functions. Under some ADA types of issues, we need to identify essential job functions for the positions. POOL/PACT HR has recommended some modifications to all of our job descriptions coming forward. One ofthose is that we are listing essential job functions here and those are things that someone has to do to perform the job and that is where you start looking at accommodations and that sort ofthing. If you list in there, "other related duties as assigned",

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 18 that really isn't necessarily an essential job function; it is something that they will do and that is why it is listed at the top as assigned job tasks/duties are not limited to the essential job functions but they may be required to perform all duties listed and may be required to perform additional position specific tasks. There is room, again, to add additional tasks in there, it just is not really an essential job function- it is not why the job exists to do other duties as assigned. We still leave the flexibility to give them more work but it is not the essential job function. Discussion followed about where to find the information being referred to as Commissioner Olsen appeared to not have the most current version. The proposed language was explained again by HR Director Stark. Commissioner Olsen apologized for the confusion. Commissioner Erquiaga asked how much input was received from the Department Heads. Mr. Stark said it was brought up at a Department Head meeting last week where they were asked to provide any input to him by last Tuesday. He only heard from one Department Head to provide additional input on the job description. There was also some discussion at the meeting, so some of that was incorporated into the job description, as well. The discussion at the meeting probably took about 15-20 minutes and then he had only one person come forward after the meeting, which is a more correct way to state it. Chairman Frey asked if there was any further discussion. HR Director Stark asked to clarify whether the board wanted to strike the word "local" under the experience and if we are satisfied if it just says "government administration". Commissioner Erquiaga said he thinks it is just a desired characteristic, so he doesn't think it makes a lot of difference. Commissioner Olsen said he likes the amount of latitude that we have as it is. HR Director clarified that he meant leaving it as it is. Commissioner Olsen said he thinks that Commissioner Erquiaga is right that we still have latitude based on the way it is worded. Chairman Frey said, in his mind, that latitude allows us great latitude. We are not going to be running a large portion of this process, as he understands it, unless we want to have the three County Commissioners review 100 applications and prospective suitors for this job, so there will be great latitude given within that. We may find, in the process, that somebody really shines that may not have the 8 years of experience or whatever but that there are other qualifications that we find desirable or that the committee finds desirable. Interim County Manager Selinder asked, rather than making an absolute for the 8 years of experience, do they still use the terminology "or any combination of skills and experience". HR Director Stark said he always uses a statement that says that any combination of required skills and abilities. Mr. Selinder asked if that may be a more appropriate thing to state. Chairman Frey suggested "comparable skill sets". HR Director Stark read, "the position requires a combination of experience and/or education that would likely provide successful job performance, such as ... " and then you give the examples. There is always other experience that may be comparable. The difficulty you have when you do that, again, is that when you have a selection committee, we want to make that process as objective as possible so that they are not being subjective on every item because it will make their task way more difficult. We are trying to define who we want this person to be and we do not want five different people saying this is what I want. We want to be able to define it based on the job description. Commissioner Olsen made a motion to approve the job description for the County Manager as modified in revision #2 updated June 7, 2012. Commissioner Erquiaga seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 19 Chairman Frey said the next thing he would like to discuss are the recruitment issues. HR Director Stark said we have talked about head hunters, we've talked about POOLIP ACT HR, and we've talked about the county staff handling that, which are all options. Staff just wants the board to define who will handle it. Chairman Frey said he is personally comfortable with having HR Director Stark, working in conjunction with Interim County Manager Selinder. He said the board will take public comment on any of these items. District Attorney Mallory said we need to be aware of the fact that, right now, the way our county is structured, the head of Human Resources would be an employee subject to at-will termination by the County Manager. Therefore, he suggested to the board that they make the Interim County Manager the lead in this process, with the assistance of Mr. Stark. Based on his conversations with George Taylor at the Attorney General's Office concerning the Open Meeting Law provisions, unless we want this to go into the Open Meeting Law venue with all of 100 applications being subject to the Open Meeting Law, he would recommend that the board tum it over to the Interim County Manager, with the assistance ofHR Director Stark, and let them devise a system to screen and present to the board whatever the board's desired number of candidates would be that meet the criteria to perform, as closely as possible, with the job description. He suggested they let Mr. Selinder make the decisions about whether he uses a committee and the make-up of the committee. He was present at the meetings, public and Department Head, where there was concern for there being both public employees and private sector people represented on the committee. He can take those comments for what they are worth but the board can give him any detailed instruction, which will flip it over to the Open Meeting Law arena, which we were trying to avoid because of the confidentiality of people who apply. That would be the way for us to accomplish that but, once again, for Mr. Stark's sake, he would suggest that Mr. Selinder take the lead and responsibility and, that way, everyone will know where that responsibility lies. Chairman Frey said he would like to take that action by way of another motion. Mr. Mallory's comments are very appurtenant to this and he has the utmost confidence in Mr. Selinder's knowledge of how to go about things, working in conjunction with Mr. Stark. They can also work with POOLIP ACT HR. Mr. Stark said they will make themselves available to the county. He asked if there was any public comment but there was none. Mr. Stark stated, for the record, that he does not plan to apply for the position, so he is not trying to gear anything to his advantage at all. Commissioner Olsen said he struggled with this and some of the issues that Mr. Mallory just brought up about this process. It seems to him that this is one of the most important decisions that he will make as a County Commissioner. He has joked with folks that this is going to be two dates and then we'll be married. Honestly, he has struggled a little bit with the process. He thinks he has reduced this down, in his own mind, to spending $30,000 to $40,000 on a head hunter. He's taken that approach in the past where the money was spent but they still got a lousy candidate. He thinks that that approach is not a direction he would encourage us to go. He believes we have the resources at hand to pursue this with staff available here at the county, although he is concerned about process and in defining where that line is because of the same thing that Mr. Mallory just brought up with the instance of Mr. Stark being brought into the process in too prominent a role. He would then be choosing whom might be his direct superior who, in tum, might be beholden to Geof in the future and it creates this mess. Mr. Selinder seems to be the perfect candidate because he stands in the position of having nothing to gain or lose, other than his reputation. He thinks that is a logical choice. He hopes that he is careful about which advice he takes and from where he takes it to avoid this issue that Mr. Stark might

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 20 have. Obviously, we should use all of the tools in the toolbox, such as consultation with POOLIP ACT and whatever other resources are available to us. He knows that, in our previous discussions, we talked about possibly whittling it down to 5 candidates. Going back to this thing where, in his mind, this is probably the most important decision he will make as a Commissioner, he thinks he wants to preserve more of that job for himself. In light of that, having 5 candidates might not be enough for him. He is thinking more in the range of 8 to 10 candidates. He has gotten rid of much of the white noise with this process. Of course, it will be staff or the committee's job to get rid of the people who do not qualify and then to narrow the numbers down to a manageable level that the board can get their arms around and understand and, yet, still preserve the decision making process with this board. Chairman Frey said he thinks that direction can be given in the next motion that the board will do by stating who will handle the process or who to give the direction to and how many we would like them to bring back for the board's consideration. Commissioner Olsen said those are his thoughts. If the board agrees, then we can incorporate that into a motion. He would like to do that and he would propose that those thoughts be incorporated into the process but he would like to hear what the other board members think. Chairman Frey said he is fine with the suggestions made by Commissioner Olsen. Commissioner Erquiaga said he is in complete agreement and he thinks that Geof was probably going to be - well, he doesn't know because that would be up to whoever we put in charge, whether or not he will play an active role in the selection or not. There has been some talk of having a committee, if that is the direction the Interim County Manager chooses to go, he knows there are already some people who have volunteered to serve on that from the public sector, at least one person for sure. He agrees that we should not limit it to 5 candidates. He thinks if there are 6 or 7 or more that we should consider them. We do not want to rule somebody out just on a number. HR Director Stark commented that they use a scoring grid to rank the applications. It has always been his philosophy not to say we are going to give you 5 because he doesn't want to rule out number 6 if they are that close to the top 5. So, he suggested that we say approximately 10 candidates if that is what they are looking for, just so that we are not limiting ourselves and we don't knock someone off just because they are one point out from everyone else. Mr. Selinder said that brings up an interesting issue and one that he has seen recently in bigger counties, such as Washoe County, where they have had to make some public selections. It seems to him that they come up with sort of a tentative list after narrowing everything down and then whatever board is responsible for taking an action will winnow that out further and maybe select 3 candidates that we can all agree on to move further through the process, including possibly an interview and so on in a very public setting. Maybe that will provide the board a couple of bites at the apple to make sure that the board has a couple of opportunities to consider the applicants. A third opportunity might be when the board interviews the applicants. That may be the process and he thinks he can figure that out. As far as Geof is concerned in his role in this, they discussed that aspect a bit yesterday. Geof sort of pictured himself, assuming that it were to fall upon Mr. Selinder's shoulders, as far as the process itself, more as a facilitator rather than a direct participant. In that way, he really won't be part of the decision making process as much as he would be in providing the committee and himself with the information that might be requested. Chairman Frey said he thinks that is a good position to be in, as well as offering advice related to HR matters and facilitating the process to move along.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 21 Commissioner Olsen made a motion to direct the Interim County Manager, with the assistance of the Human Resources Director, to immediately begin the recruitment process for the County Manager and, furthermore, to bring back up to 10 qualified applicants to the board for consideration, based on the guidelines previously approved. Commissioner Erquiaga seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. Chairman Frey said the next item on the recruitment issue is where to conduct the recruitment. He is in favor of a regional approach to the advertising, personally. In doing so, it will be international because it will be on our website and probably on NACO's website or other entities like that, as recommended. Even though we are trying to direct it regionally, in reality, all candidates can apply. He thinks, when we get into the questions, that will give some preference to the regional candidates. HR Director Stark said these questions are questions that have come to his mind over time. In light of what the District Attorney has said, he doesn't know how many of these questions need to be here or go to the Interim County Manager in terms of direct involvement by the board or the Interim County Manager. He just wanted to raise that issue to make sure that everyone feels comfortable with it. Chairman Frey requested that the District Attorney, anytime that he thinks they are stepping over the boundary of giving too much direction, that he stop them from that direction. District Attorney Mallory said, in answer to that and based on his conversations with the Attorney General's Office, he thinks there is nothing wrong with the board expressing its preference, such as a preference to take on a regional approach, but the final decision making process will be up to the board's designated chairman of the search, which will be Mr. Selinder. The other board members can express how they feel about the regional approach and then Mr. Selinder will take that as part of what he is to accomplish and go forward. Chairman Frey said he thinks having someone regionally would give the benefit of the knowledge of local issues, such as the water issues, BLM issues, planning issues, and those types of things. Commissioner Olsen said he thinks those are the important issues to us and he believes that BJ will, intuitively, know what is important to the board. When you get down to some of the more mundane stuff about how the applications are ranked, on what basis to reject them, etc., those things are given over to BJ for handling. The same that we would if we had a paid head hunter looking for us. We would give them all of that discretion, as well. Commissioner Erquiaga said he agreed that we need to stay regionally, with the understanding that we will get people from all over, possibly, which is fine. He doesn't know that there would even be a legal basis for restricting where you can apply from. He can't imagine that there would be. District Attorney Mallory said anyone can send in an application but there is no legal requirement, based on NRS, to impose any restrictions on who the board's choice is. Chairman Frey said much of that can be handled in the application format and supplemental questions that will be asked. Commissioner Erquiaga said he agrees with Commissioner Olsen that this is a very important decision and, as he said, probably is the most important one that they will make. He thinks, at some point, we have to have some faith, and he does, that BJ has heard all of the discussions, has heard all of the preferences, and he will act in the best interests of the county. Chairman Frey said he doesn't see a need for a motion. With regard to the application format, as far as that item on the recruitment issues, he can leave that up to BJ and Geof to work out how they want to work with that. He thinks they are both knowledgeable of the issues, as

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 22 well as the supplemental questionnaire or any questions that are asked to get the type of candidate that we have expressed interest in soliciting. Commissioner Olsen said he had a question because there is a proposed budget. He asked Comptroller Kalt where those funds come from and should the board make a motion to allot $10,000 for the recruitment process. Commissioner Erquiaga said the money can come from what we are saving right now by not having someone in the position. Comptroller Kalt said there are funds in the final budget adopted by the board for professional services, travel, and those types of things within general government. Chairman Frey said to tell him if he is wrong but, in his mind, with regard to the application format and questions that would be asked on the application, the board is comfortable allowing staff to handle that. If so, then we need to discuss the monetary aspect of things. The time line and money do need to be discussed. He is comfortable with leaving BJ and Geof to handle the application and questionnaire aspects. Mr. Selinder stated that he thinks the board can hold off on any monetary appropriations simply because, until the board knows how many people will be interviewed and where they are located and so on, the actual process of advertising is not that expensive, so we can deal with that very adequately out of existing budgetary line items. He knows that Comptroller Kalt will be more than capable of finding sufficient resources. If it is all the same to the board, we can bring that aspect up at a later date as we get closer and begin to look at this from the standpoint of who is being submitted for consideration by the board. Chairman Frey said he thinks the main issue is whether we prefer to pay people to come here to interview personally or not. That is a discussion that he thinks the board needs to have. He asked to go over the timeline next, as long as the board agrees to allow BJ to handle the application format and supplemental questionnaire. Both Commissioners were in agreement with that aspect. Chairman Frey said, in reviewing the timeline, it looks like advertising starts immediately. The only thing he sees as different is that the update to the County Commissioners at their July 5th meeting because that meeting will, quite possibly, be rescheduled to July 9th or something. HR Director Stark said he understood that meeting might be rescheduled, which will not create an issue as that will only be to provide an update to the board at that meeting whenever it is scheduled. Chairman Frey wanted to make sure it would not impact the remainder of the time line. HR Director Stark said this is an ambitious timeline but he is trying to work within that 120 days but we also know that BJ's contract could be extended, if need be. That is the goal, so he has made that the target on this timeline. Updates will be provided to the board as we go along. Chairman Frey said he thinks it is incumbent upon the Commissioners, when they are in the building, to check on the process. He asked if the other Commissioners had any problem with the timeline but they did not. The timeline has to be flexible, as well. Chairman Frey led into the budget and recruitment aspect. He sees no need to be extravagant but to do the basic advertising of this position. He doesn't think we have to pay for expensive trade magazines or anything like that. HR Director Stark said, with our compressed timeline, trade magazines probably would not work anyway because they are so far out as far as publication dates that we couldn't get into them. Commissioner Olsen said some of them have online versions, however, which Mr. Stark acknowledged and he will try to hit those, as well as NACO. Chairman Frey asked if we wanted to utilize Monster.com or any of those websites. He thinks those sites would draw in an awful lot of people but will it just be a lot to sort through? HR Director Stark said, if we advertise in the Reno Gazette Journal, which we typically do for Department Head and those types of positions, that advertisement includes posting on Career

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 23 Builder.com, so we will get that exposure out, which is a national website. We get some interesting applications from those sites but, again, if we have some guidelines as to what has to be included, like that supplemental questionnaire and so forth, ifthat is not included, then those applications are rejected. Sometimes people are just shooting out their resume to any job out there. If they have not fulfilled the application process, they will not considered. Chairman Frey asked if anyone had any issue on that. He thinks those are all good ways to advertise, as well as NACO because there may be an Assistant County Manager who is interested. He doesn't want to have any kind of extravagant budget. He asked if the board is willing to pay for travel costs for a candidate's interview. If we limit it to the Great Basin, perhaps we could limit it to $500 for travel costs. HR Director Stark said that is an option to have a $500 limit per candidate. We could also make that clear in the job announcement too, so that people are aware of that. Chairman Frey suggested that they be required to submit receipts because he would not want someone to try to get $500 for coming from Fernley. HR Director Stark said it would have to be reimbursement of actual travel expenses to a maximum of $500. Chairman Frey asked if the board had any problem with that and Commissioner Olsen said he feels that is reasonable. Chairman Frey asked the board's preference for any relocation costs for the person selected. Commissioner Olsen asked if we wanted to discuss this now. HR Director Stark said that could even be part of the negotiation process. Chairman Frey next asked to address the selection committee. He said he believes we have pretty much said we would leave that up to BJ and Geof to handle. He agreed with Commissioner Olsen and asked to state, for the record, that this is the most important decision for the board to make. The person that is selected becomes the face of Churchill County. It seems like they are more well-known than the County Commissioners and others because they do need to be out and about representing the county. He asked if there was anything further to discuss or provide guidance. HR Director Stark said he felt confident with the direction given for now. Chairman Frey called for a ten minute break. Upon return, the meeting reconvened. Consideration and possible action re: Reclassification of the Parks and Recreation Director and Building & Grounds Maintenance Tech. Interim County Manager Selinder reported that, on October 6, 2011, the Commission unanimously approved the Parks and Recreation Director to evaluate the Facilities and Grounds Department to assess the viability of departmental consolidation and, furthermore, approved a stipend in the amount of$1,500 per month to the Parks and Recreation Director as Extra-Duty pay, effective September 26, 2011 to March 31 , 2012. During that period, the Parks and Recreation Director had an opportunity to discuss the proposed consolidation during Departmental Tours on December 12 and 13 , 2011 and to prepare a consolidated budget for consideration during Commission Budget Hearings on January 31 and February 1, 2012. As the motion made on October 6, 2011 was set to expire on March 31 , 2012, the Commission made a motion, on March 21 , 2012, and unanimously approved an extension of the stipend until such time that the budgetary request for reclassification in FY 2013 was decided upon. Staff surveyed Class 3 counties regarding salaries paid to Department Heads with similar duties and responsibility levels, which had previously been provided to the board when this proposal was first presented during the tentative budget process. The proposal included salary information for the consolidation, as well as significant overall savings to the county by merging the departments and eliminating the Facilities and Grounds Supervisor position. The tentative budget included funding for the Parks and Recreation Director to be placed on Step 6 of Range

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 24 76 as the Community Services Director and for the Building and Grounds Maintenance Tech to be placed on Step 12 of Range 50 as the Facilities and Grounds Lead. Recently, it was brought forward that the proposal may not be in line with Title 3, which states, in Chapter 3.32.90 Salary Upon Reclassification B: "Ifthe position is reclassified to a class with a higher salary range than the previous class, the salary for the employee in the position shall be set in the same manner as provided for employees receiving a promotion and the employee's anniversary date shall be adjusted to the effective date for the reclassification." Chapter 3.32.70 Salary Upon Promotion states: "When an employee is promoted he/she shall be entitled to the lowest step in the higher range that provides at least a two-step increase over the salary last received." Ifthis circumstance were deemed to apply, it would place the Community Services Director on Step 2 ofRange 76 (instead of Step 6) and the Facilities and Grounds Lead on Step 8 of Range 50 (instead of Step 12). In speaking with the Civil Deputy District Attorney, Craig Mingay, staff concurs that the foregoing language is ambiguous, at best. The language seems to contemplate that a person promoted is entitled to "at least" a two-step increase over the salary last received. In other words, a person promoted is to receive a salary increase equal to not less than a two-step increase, thus establishing a minimum increase, not a maximum increase. However, given the ambiguous language ofthe section within Title 3 and taking into consideration the unique circumstances surrounding the consolidation, it is staffs recommendation that a compromise between the tentative budget and the final budget be made by "meeting in the middle" and placing the Community Services Director on Step 4 of Range 76 and the Facilities and Grounds Lead on Step 10 of Range 50. This will result in the positions being placed 2 steps lower on the scale than the original proposal. Given that, with this "reclassification/promotion", there is no relinquishing of job duties, only the addition of more job responsibilities and staff, as well as a unique opportunity for the county to consolidate these departments and realize consideration savings in doing so, staff believes this to be a fair recommendation. In moving forward with the consolidation and reclassification of the Parks and Recreation Director to the Community Services Director, the recommended option, including benefits, will result in an additional reduction between the tentative budget and the final budget of $5,822.39. Likewise, for the reclassification of the Buildings and Grounds Tech to the Facilities and Grounds Lead, the additional reduction will be $3 ,555.02. The overall impact of the agreed upon reclassification option will result in significant savings by eliminating the need to hire a new Facilities and Grounds Supervisor, as well as a number of fixed and variable cost savings. Given the overall savings from the elimination of the Facilities and Grounds Supervisor position and the reclassification of the Parks and Recreation Director and the Building and Grounds Maintenance Tech, there are sufficient funds available in the final budget as adopted by the board. Chairman Frey asked if we have an obligation or ifthere is a written job description for the Community Services Director. Should we go in that direction before we reclassify the Parks and Recreation Director? Human Resources Director Stark said that, right now, we do not have a job description for the position. That is something that he would want to bring to the board at the next meeting. In the past, what we have done, through the budgetary process, is to reclassify employees to new positions and then, after that was approved by the board, we have adopted a job description that the board adopted, ideally, before the new fiscal year kicks in and the changes go into effect. He would think the board could still take an action and then a job description could be brought to the board for both positions being considered now at the next

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 25 board meeting. Chairman Frey said he has no problem with that process but he will not be at the next board meeting, so he would request seeing those job descriptions as early as possible to enable him to provide input. He doesn't anticipate that there would be anything that would cause him to not have trust in these other two Commissioners. Interim County Manager said he believes that Mr. Stark has already begun working on an amendment to Title 3 and will take that before the Employee Management Committee for consideration and approval. Chairman Frey said it is good to work that out with the Employee Management Committee and it seems to him that it might be good to consider having something in Title 3 that says Title 3 takes precedence over something else if there is a conflict and that Title 3 would prevail and resolve the issue if a conflict exists. We could then renegotiate after that and come back to consider a job description and increase. The other thing he wanted to do, since both employees are here, is to find out if they are in agreement with all of this. He noted, for the record, that they have answered in the affirmative from the audience. He thinks that, with the new economy we are dealing with, we need to do more consolidation and it may take a couple of years to get it accomplished. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment but there was none. He asked legal counsel if he is satisfied with the way this was put together. Civil Deputy District Attorney Mingay replied that he believes it represents the right conclusion with the code, so he is happy with it. Commissioner Olsen said he wanted to go back to something that Mr. Stark said earlier. It seems that the cart is ahead of the horse with the job description versus the salary issues. He feels it would make more sense to consider them together. Geof said that we have done it this way in the past. Mr. Stark responded that it doesn't mean we can't change that. Commissioner Olsen said if that is just because there has been a lot going on and we've been busy, so they are rushing to get this done and they have this part fixed and then we will get the other part done, he is fine with that. It just seems to him that the better practice, in the future, the normal practice should be that the board consider them simultaneously because these things are married together. Chairman Frey said, as far as he is concerned, since he will be gone at the next meeting, he doesn't see any need to rush this. It takes effect on July 1st. He is having his opportunity to get his input in here. He, too, thinks we might want to create the position of Community Services Director and set it at whatever salary level. He will work with staff to review and provide input up until the time his plane leaves. The other two Commissioners could then deal with the matter at the next meeting, which would be fine with him. If we choose to table this today, he has no problem with that. He thinks the direction is set as the negotiations have been had. It would make more sense to have the positions within the books and then fill the positions and set the salary at that time. Mr. Stark said he would be able to get it prepared within that timeframe. He will consult with both employees to make sure that what he comes up with is what we want those positions to be now. He will have it ready beforehand so that Chairman Frey can provide input prior to leaving. He will also make a mental note to conduct it in this manner in the future as part ofthe process to provide job descriptions at the time the budgets come forward. Chairman Frey said he thinks we are going to see some of that in the future and that some of them will be very difficult to work on. A few more may come along if we do consolidate because, he thinks, today's economy requires us to do so. Mr. Stark said we may have a job description that says "other duties as assigned". Mr. Selinder said he knows these gentlemen are anxious for a resolution to this issue and he certainly understands that but he thinks the board needs to take its time to evaluate the whole

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 26 matter in a way that the board wants to do so. He thinks that, hopefully, even if it were to go beyond the next meeting into July or something like that, the board can give a direction to make it applicable from the 1st of July. Commissioner Olsen asked if the board was in consensus to table the matter. He doesn't have a problem with doing this and he didn't mean to gum the works up with his comments. He is agreeable with doing this now or for saving this for the next meeting. Chairman Frey said he would feel better if we tabled the matter to start the cleaner process of having the position with the salary as we move forward. Commissioner Erquiaga said he has no problem either way. These gentlemen have been to at least 3 meetings now and they have better things to do with their time. He is sure that they would like to have some resolution. He would envision that the job descriptions would be pretty much what they do in the salary range of 76 and 50 and where they land depends on the candidate. Either way is fine with him. Commissioner Olsen said he hopes the men are getting the flavor that the board is just trying to marry things together and that there is not an issue with the agreement. The board just wants to put it all together in one package, put a bow on it, and get it done. At their indulgence, the board would like a few more weeks. Commissioner Erquiaga said he had a couple more questions. With regard to the title of Community Services Director, does that mean that the departments will change names also or just the director? Parks and Recreation Director Guerrero said that, initially, they are going to be the Community Services Department but, within the department, they will still function as the Parks and Recreation Department, as the Cemetery, and as the Facilities and Grounds Department. However, they will be one super department but they will have divisions within that department. The folks within those departments will continue with their titles. The only title that will change will be his own as he oversees all three of the departments. At least, that is their ambition. Chairman Frey said he is fine with that and he is sure that can be taken up with the accounting aspect. Comptroller Kalt said they are looking at, as we move forward with consolidation in the future, breaking out separate -right now, the Cemetery is within the General Fund, the Facilities and Grounds Department is within the General Fund, and the Parks and Recreation Department is a Special Revenue Fund. As we go with Community Services, we may create a new fund. It may include, down the road, Social Services and Planning and other things. Who knows what the board may come up with how those bubbles might look. He thinks it is premature, in the short term, to change how we currently have it. Comptroller Kalt said, right now, the Parks and Recreation Department has different divisions such as Parks and Recreation, Athletics, Administration, Swimming Pool, Fairgrounds, etc. Commissioner Erquiaga said it would just mean which department will be chosen to put that salary under. Comptroller Kalt said that will be put under the Parks and Recreation Administrative Budget. Mr. Guerrero said, as for himself, to help track all ofthe budgets, he would prefer to have it stay the same as it is now because it is much easier for him to do that. Even within Parks and Recreation, they have five budgets and it makes it much easier for him to track budgets in that sense and it makes it easier for his staff, as well, because they know what money their position is attached to as they do everyday functions and ask for draw requests from those budgets. He prefers that it remains the same instead of lumping all of the budgets together and having one big super budget. For himself, for tracking purposes, it would make it very difficult. Commissioner Erquiaga asked, when using people from one department to another, if there is accounting for that. Mr. Guerrero said they are doing that already. He doesn't see it being an issue to the budgets. It would be more of a service and supplies item if they were to fix a facility at Parks

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 27 and Recreation or even at the Swimming Pool and Gary was carrying out the work, anything that was purchased for making those repairs would come out of that budget. Of course, all employees defer to him as the Department Head to say which line item to utilize but, as far as salaries, that is all-encompassing for the whole department. At least that is the way that he has been doing it. Chairman Frey said it is when you have the tractor and loader that was purchased for Parks and Recreation and then it has to go out to the Cemetery to move fertilizer or something like that, it has to be tracked. Mr. Guerrero said but, also, all of their funding comes from the General Fund. An example would be like the Road Department, when he borrows equipment from them, they have to charge him because of the way that they are funded. The rest of his departments, including the Cemetery, are all out of the General Fund, so he sees no hurtles there, unless Comptroller Kalt knows of something. Comptroller Kalt stated that the Parks and Recreation Fund is actually a Special Revenue Fund but our system currently works pretty well. Chairman Frey asked counsel, if this matter is tabled without a date, does that kill the matter and would it, then, be more appropriate to table it with a specific date. Commissioner Olsen said his motion was to table it to the next meeting. Commissioner Olsen made a motion to table the matter until the next meeting on June 20, 2012. Commissioner Erquiaga seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. Commissioner Erquiaga asked about the ambiguity in Title 3 - if we do not remove the ambiguity or if we do this, are we saying that all future promotions or reclassifications become salary negotiable? Human Resources Director Stark said he just put some language together yesterday addressing this issue and there would be two sets of circumstances. One would be just a standard upward reclassification or promotion, which would put the person at the first step of a two-step increase. It will no longer say "at least". Then there is a second paragraph that says that, basically, it is an exception that says that, if it is a reclassification that results in greater efficiencies and salary savings, then they can be placed at a step in the range that would be determined by the County Commissioners. That will give us some room to be more flexible with what types of things we are talking about doing but it doesn't open it up to every time there is a promotion or reclassification that it will come back to the board. A normal one would be a two­ step increase and then, when we have something that mirrors this situation, which is where we are talking about going when we discuss financial issues, it will come before the board to determine if they want to do more than two-steps. One of the situations we have had is when we hire a new employee from outside the organization, we have room to give them an advanced step placement. There are certain qualifications that they have to meet and this would be something for internal candidates where, again, they could be placed a different step based on special circumstances. That would very narrowly define what that would be and there would have to be salary savings, efficiencies, and that sort of thing to do that. Commissioner Erquiaga said that was his thought too. Sometimes, this is the case where responsibilities are higher than they were when you take someone in a low-paid position and you make them County Manager, it would result in more than a two-step increase. Civil Deputy District Attorney said that would be considered a promotion under Title 3 and would still only be a two-step increase. Mr. Stark said that is not correct because you would go to the first step in the range that is a two-step increase. If you were making $12 per hour and you go to County Manager, that first step in the range is going to be a lot more than a two-step increase. Commissioner Erquiaga said he just wants to make sure that it is clear.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 28 Chairman Frey said he wants to jump forward a little bit since the Sheriff is still here because the board has a jail inspection scheduled following the meeting but, due to time constraints with the long meeting, it most likely will not be able to be conducted at the close of this meeting. He asked if they could reschedule for 2:00p.m. or so when they are finished with the Telephone Company meeting, which was agreed to. NEW BUSINESS: Consideration and possible action re: Request Transfer of Funds to the Churchill County Road Department and Equipment Replacement Plan for the Cattle Guard Replacement Project. At the regular Regional Transportation meeting held on May 16, 2012, the board approved the following transfers, subject to available funding: 1. Transfer of funds to the Churchill County Road Department from Regional Transportation Funds in the amount of $31 ,024.26 for first and final payment on the Cattle Guard Replacement Project. 2. Transfer of funds to the Equipment Replacement Plan in the amount of$4,743 .94 from Regional Transportation Funds for the Cattle Guard Replacement Project. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment but there was none. Commissioner Erquiaga made a motion to approve the stated transfers as approved by the Regional Transportation Commission, subject to available funding as recommended by the County Comptroller. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. Consideration and possible action re: Declaration of certain uncollected property taxes for the Fiscal Years 2006-2007 through 2010-2011 as uncollectable and striking those taxes from the tax rolls. Civil Deputy District Attorney Mingay reported that, pursuant to NRS 361.725, the District Attorney is required to deliver to the county auditor a statement of the delinquent taxes. The statement is required to be filed with the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners. The County Commissioners are required to strike those taxes that cannot be collected. Attached as Exhibit "A" to the statement of uncollected taxes is a spreadsheet detailing those taxes that have been deemed by the Churchill County Assessor and the Churchill County District Attorney as unable to be collected. The comments section indicates the reasons why the specific tax cannot be collected but, on most cases, the responsible party is out of business, bankrupt, without assets to seize, and/or unable to be contacted. The total amount of taxes owed that will be removed from the rolls is $12,436.57. All prior efforts to collect the taxes have been unsuccessful. Given the amounts owed by each individual, the cost of further collection efforts in staff time and with the likelihood of collecting the money, it is recommended that the board strike the listed uncollected taxes. The cost associated with pursuing legal action for collection is not warranted. The fiscal impact represents the amount of tax revenue that will be stricken from the rolls by this action. It is not anticipated that any efforts made by the county would be successful in collecting this amount of money in any event. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment but there was none. Commissioner Olsen made a motion to approve striking the uncollected taxes from the tax roll as set forth by the provided Statement of Uncollected Taxes. Commissioner Erquiaga seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 29 Consideration and possible action re: Appointment to the Library Board of Trustees, Geo( Stark, Human Resources Director. Human Resources Director Stark reported that the Library Board has one vacancy, due to the recent resignation of a board member. This opening was posted in the local newspaper asking interested citizens to apply. Applications were due by May 9, 2012. Two applications were received from Ann Rapp and Rebecca Taylor. A recommendation committee, comprised of Human Resources Director Geof Stark, Library Director Barbara Mathews, and Library Board Chair Zip Upham, met with both candidates to discuss their backgrounds and their fit with the Library Board. Both candidates expressed a strong desire to serve on the board and are qualified. Ms. Rapp has been involved with the Library Foundation and has shown great interest in the Library and its development and growth. Because of her past involvement and her ongoing desire, the committee recommends Ms. Rapp be appointed to fill the vacancy. He believes that Library Director Mathews is going to talk to Rebecca Taylor to see if she is interested in serving on the Library Foundation because she has a lot of energy and desire to be involved, as well. They are going to try to make good use of her time, as well. Chairman Frey said he believes that they may have had another resignation by Kathy Cave, so we may want to keep her name for that opening. He suggested that Mr. Stark check with Ms. Mathews about that. Commissioner Erquiaga made a motion that the county appoint Ann Rapp to the Library Board to fill a term that expires on June 30, 2016. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. Consideration and possible action re: Appointments to the Advisory Board to Manage Wildlife, Geo(Stark, Human Resources Director. Human Resources Director Stark reported that the Advisory Board to Manage Wildlife has two vacancies upcoming, due to two expired terms. This opening was posted in the local newspaper asking interested citizens to apply. Applications were due by May 14, 2012. Four applications were received- two were from incumbents Troy Smith and Sam Bradley; the other two were received from Eric Clifford and Christopher Mendoza. A recommendation committee was set up and interviews with the new applicants were held. Mr. Mendoza withdrew his application. After consideration, the committee recommends that Troy Smith be reappointed and that Eric Clifford be appointed to the Advisory Board to Manage Wildlife. They would like to acknowledge that Sam Bradley has served for at least 23 years on the board with his second term on that board, so he has been a very valuable member on that board. Chairman Frey expressed his appreciation to Mr. Bradley for his many, many years of dedicated service. Commissioner Olsen asked if it would be appropriate to include in the recommendation that a plaque be presented to Mr. Bradley for his many years of service. Commissioner Erquiaga asked to disclose that Eric Clifford is his second cousin but he discussed the matter with the District Attorney and believes there is no conflict since it is a non-paid position, so he will participate in the vote. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment but there was none. Commissioner Olsen made a motion that the county reappoint Troy Smith and appoint Eric Clifford to the Advisory Board to Manage Wildlife to fill a term that expires on July 31,2015 and to send a plaque and letter to Sam Bradley for his years of service. Commissioner Erquiaga seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 30 Consideration and possible action re: Appointment to the Parks and Recreation Commission, Geo{Stark, Human Resources Director. Human Resources Director Stark reported that the Parks and Recreation Commission currently has one vacancy due to the recent resignation of a board member. This opening was posted in the local newspaper asking interested citizens to apply. Applications were due by May 21, 2012. Three applications were received, from Ava Case, Mary Arthur, and Jill Andrews. A recommendation committee, made up of Human Resources Director Geof Stark, Parks and Recreation Director Jorge Guerrero, and Parks and Recreation Commission Chair Kris Renfro, held interviews with all the candidates on June 1, 2012. The committee recommends that Ava Case be appointed to fill the vacancy. Commissioner Erquiaga made a motion that the county appoint Ava Case to the Parks and Recreation Commission to fill a term that expires on June 30, 2013. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. Consideration and possible action re: Health, Dental, and Vision Insurance Renewal for Churchill County Employees and Retirees for Fiscal Year 2012-2013. Human Resources Director Stark reported that, as the fiscal year approaches an end, it is time to look at renewal options for the insurance program the county provides to Churchill County employees and retirees. The renewal coincides with the county's fiscal year. Through the first ten months of the current plan year (insurance claims through April of 2012), the county's loss ratio is approximately 75%. This means the insurance company paid out $0.75 in claims for every $1.00 the county paid for premium. This would typically be considered a "good" year, since the break-even point for insurance companies is somewhere around 80%. The Insurance Advisory Committee (lAC) received a renewal from Saint Mary's that included a 13% increase in premiums. This seemed high, so the lAC directed the county's consultants from LIP Insurance to secure other quotes. Quotes received from Anthem and Cigna reflected decreased premiums; Saint Mary's then re-quoted at a 0% increase. The lAC then asked for some modifications from Cigna and asked Saint Mary's to reduce their quote further, down to a 5% decrease, if possible. Resulting quotes were received. After much discussion, the lAC made a recommendation to renew with Cigna (choosing Option 2, on page 7 of the attachment). Cigna Option 2 matches the county's current plans, with some changes. • On the positive side, the following changes would occur: o Deductibles on the main plan (Open Access Plus $500) are reduced by half (down to $500 for in-plan providers) o Deductibles on the Open Access Plus $250 are also reduced by half (down to $250) and the outpatient copay of $250 is available to those who choose this plan. o Cigna matched the $250 co-pay for outpatient surgery that is available on the current plan. o Cigna's providers include physicians from both Saint Mary's' network and Renown's network, providing more provider options to our employees and retirees. o Prescription co-pays were reduced. • On the negative side:

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 31 o Co-pays for hi-tech scans (CT Scans, MRis, etc.) are eliminated. Employee would have to pay their deductible and then 20%, rather than a $250 co-pay. o Out-of-network reimbursements are reduced from 60% to 50%. o Because of the lower premiums on the main plan (Open Access Plus $500), the county's HSA contribution to those who choose the high deductible plan would reduce to $164/month (down from $215/month currently contributed). The $164 is still considered a "healthy" employer contribution to the HSA, but it would be $607 lower than the previous fiscal year. In the end, the lAC determined that Cigna Option 2 would actually provide benefit enhancements, while lowering premiums. The monthly premium paid by the county for each employee would reduce to $655.57, from the current $710.12. This is a reduction of approximately 7.5% on the medical insurance. The lAC also looked at the dental insurance renewal. The current provider, The Guardian, offered a 10% reduction. The lAC looked at other options and Sun Life offered a 16.8% reduction, with the rate guaranteed for two years. The lAC compared providers between Guardian and Sun Life and determined that both plans provided the same local providers. Based on this, the lAC recommends moving the dental insurance to Sun Life. Finally, the lAC reviewed vision insurance coverage. VSP, the current provider, came in with a flat-rate renewal (no increase). The lAC looked at other options and was impressed with rates provided by Superior Vision. Originally, they quoted at a 45% reduction, guaranteed for 48 months. After further discussion and investigation, the lAC discovered Superior's quote was based on employer-paid coverage (not voluntary coverage). MES' quote was also based on employer-paid coverage. LIP Insurance asked for corrected quotes- this resulted in a 23% reduction from Superior, with the same 48-month rate guarantee. Superior also has all the local vision providers included on its plan, included the optical center at Wal-Mart. The lAC recommends moving the vision insurance to Superior. In summary, the lAC recommends the following: • Health Insurance- Switch from Saint Mary's to Cigna, choosing Option B, resulting in a 7.5% decrease in health insurance premiums. • Dental Insurance- Switch from The Guardian to Sun Life, resulting in a 16.8% decrease, with a guaranteed rate for 24 months. • Vision Insurance- Switch from VSP to Superior Vision, resulting in a 23% decrease, with a guaranteed rate for 48 months. This coverage would remain as voluntary, 100% employee-paid. The fiscal impact would result in a savings of$108,394. The savings number is based on FY 12- 13 rates compared to FY 11-12 rates: medical savings of$92,299; dental savings of$16,096; and vision savings is not reflected since it is paid for 100% by employees. County Comptroller Alan Kalt indicates that sufficient funding may be allocated from the General Fund in the FY 12- 13 budget. The tentative budget included a budgeted amount of $9,450 for each employee for the year. The proposed changes will amount to $8,226.84 per year per employee (an overall 8.3% reduction). Chairman Frey asked ifthere was any public comment but there was none.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 32 Commissioner Olsen made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Insurance Advisory Committee for employee health, dental, and vision insurance for Fiscal Year 2012-2013, which recommendation includes the following: health insurance being switched from St. Mary's to Cigna, choosing Option B, resulting in a 7.5% decrease in health insurance premiums; dental insurance being switched from The Guardian to Sun Life, resulting a 16.8% premium reduction, noting that the lower rates are guaranteed for 2 years; vision insurance being restored to employer paid vision insurance coverage for active employees, switching from VSP to Superior Vision, resulting a 45% decrease, with a guaranteed rate for 4 years, noting that the costs of restoring this employer paid vision insurance is approximately $10,700 per year. The improved fmal budget will cover the costs of this board action. Furthermore, to set the employee voluntary flexible spending account, administered by Aflac, amount at $2,500 effective July 1, 2012 to be in compliance with the Health Care Reform Legislation. Commissioner Erquiaga seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. Consideration and possible action re: Discussion of future meeting dates, including the July 5, 2012 regular meeting for possible change of date of the regular Commissioners' meeting and Highway Commission meeting. Staffhas reviewed the meeting schedule for regularly scheduled meetings, specifically, the July 5, 2012 meeting that falls one day after the July 4th holiday. Staff requests discussion by the board as to whether they want to move the date. Comptroller Kalt will be absent for the July 1 5 h meeting but would return by Monday, July 9th, if that is the date selected. CC Communications has requested that their meeting date remain on July 5th. Commissioner Erquiaga made a motion to change the date of the regular Commissioners' meeting and Highway Commission meeting scheduled for July 5, 2012 to Tuesday, July 10, 2012, at the regular times. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. Consideration and possible action re: Adoption of Policy for the distribution of greater than anticipated CTX revenues for Fiscal Year 2011-2012. Comptroller Kalt reported that the fiscal plan is designed to allow Churchill County a method to apportion greater than anticipated CTX revenues to make up for any projected revenue shortfalls and apportion any remaining funds into the Road Fund. Therefore, these funds could be used in subsequent years to provide for Road Projects. As the board is aware, the DF A economic development project is requiring road and bridge improvements. These funds may be available to assist in the funding of that project. Consolidated Tax Collection (CTX) revenues are currently projected to be greater than budgeted for fiscal year 2011-2012 by over $100,000. This policy sets forth a method of apportioning the final fiscal year 2011-2012 CTX revenues if the net amount is greater than anticipated. It appears that the Stabilization of Operations Fund is fully funded at 10% of prior year total expenditures, less federal grant revenues, so no apportionment is needed to that fund. The following is a brief summary of the fund to be utilized in the analysis. Road Fund The county has established Road Fund to account for the building and maintain of county roads and related infrastructure. The primary source of funding is gas tax collections. By apportioning

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 33 additional revenue resources to this fund, additional projects could be completed within the Five Year Plan and those approved by the Board of County Commissioners. Additional funding would provide for subsequent year capital projects and or reserving resources for future road/bridge projects that are approved by the Board of County Commissioners. Chairman Frey asked if there was any public comment but there was no public left in the room. Commissioner Erquiaga said he met with BJ Selinder, Patti Lingenfelter, Craig Mingay, and Comptroller Kalt and the Road Department seemed to be very happy with this solution. Commissioner Erquiaga made a motion to approve the apportionment of CTX revenues which are greater than anticipated in the current year (FY 11- 12) to the Road Fund for subsequent year capital projects. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. Consideration and possible action re: Apportionment of Geothermal Rents and Royalties for Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2012. Comptroller Kalt reported that, in the amended final budget submitted to the Department of Taxation for Fiscal Year 2011-2012 submitted in July of2011, the county budgeted a total of $875,000 in Geothermal Rents and Royalties. The budget was as follows: General Fund $250,000, Building Reserve Fund $500,000, Social Services $75,000, and Extraordinary Repairs 1 and Maintenance Fund for $50,000. As of May 30 h, our total collections are $789,393 .71. It does appear that we will reach our budgeted amount. If we have greater than revenue amount, the Board of County Commissioners may adopt a fiscal policy to apportion the funds as they deem appropriate. As the policy indicates, it is recommended that the apportionment of geothermal rent and royalty revenues, which are greater than anticipated in Fiscal Year 2011-2012, shall be apportioned to the Road Fund for the receipts in Fiscal Year 2011-2012 effective on July 1, 2011. The county has approved a Five Year Road Improvement and Maintenance Plan, which is currently in place. In addition to this plan, the county has committed to build a bridge and make road improvements near the Fallon Business Park to support economic development within the community. The estimated cost ofthe professional services and improvements exceed $1.0M. These projects would benefit economic development for both the City of Fallon and Churchill County and create additional jobs within the community. It is recommended that any greater than anticipated revenues by placed in this fund to be used for road and bridge projects within the County. The projected amount of greater than anticipated revenues is likely to be under $100,000. Geothermal Rents and Royalties are paid by operators in the Geothermal Industry. Commissioner Olsen made a motion to approve the apportionment of Churchill County's greater than anticipated geothermal rents and royalties for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2012 to the Road Fund to support future road and bridge projects to be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Erquiaga seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. Comptroller Kalt reported that, at one of the next two meetings, he anticipates bringing, assuming that we receive our payment, the policy for greater than anticipated PIL T funding, which we would also want to put into the Road Fund and he will also have some monetary transfers. CONSENT ITEMS (Action items generally not requiring discussion or explanation)

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 34 All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine and may be acted upon by the Board of County Commissioners with one action and without an extensive hearing. Any member of the Board or any citizen may request that an item be taken from the Consent Agenda, discussed and acted upon separately during this meeting. 1. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS - A. Consideration and possible action re: Nevada Water Resources Association announces its 2012 NWRA Domestic Well Owner Informational Workshops in various locations. B. Consideration and possible action re: Bureau of Land Management' s Resource Management Plan Revision Socioeconomic Workshops. C. Consideration and possible action re: Nevada Division of Environmental Protection Notice of Final Decision to issue Reclamation permit to the Nevada Cement Company for the Churchill Limestone Project. D. Consideration and possible action re: The Nevada Public Agency Insurance Pool (NP AlP) and Public Agency Compensation Trust (PACT) provide their Annual Reports for Fiscal Year 2010 and 2011 . E. Consideration and possible action re: Nevada Division of Environmental Protection provides notice of issuance of the Draft Discharge Permit for the Churchill County Wastewater Treatment Facility. F. Consideration and possible action re: Governor Sandoval' s Certification of the July 2012 population estimates. G. Consideration and possible action re: Notification from NV Energy regarding the community meeting to review the benefits and impacts of the 230kV transmission line project. H. Consideration and possible action re: Nevada Division of Environmental Protection provides notice of issuance of the Draft Discharge Permit for the Moody Lane Regional Water Reclamation Facility. I. Consideration and possible action re: Notification of the Nevada Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation (DETR) Industry Sector Councils. J. Consideration and possible action re: The Nevada Association of Counties expresses appreciation for payment of Churchill County' s 2012 dues. K. Consideration and possible action re: RG Steel, LLC provides its Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act Notice related to the Wheeling facility. L. Consideration and possible action re: Submittal of the Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Final Budget for the Carson Water Subconservancy District. 2. REVIEW- A. The Churchill County Social Services Office provides notification of the receipt of an indigent medical application from Carson Tahoe Regional Hospital under Client # 121 00 for which eligibility will be determined within 30 days pursuant to Chapter 428 of the Nevada Revised Statutes. 3. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS - A. Treasurer's Report for April2012. B. Comptroller's CTX Intergovernmental Revenue Update from May 30, 2012.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 35 Commissioner Olsen said, in relation to Informational Item B, he wonders if we could have consensus about someone from the county attending those meetings to follow that RMP process closely, such as Eleanor Lockwood or BJ Selinder. If there is a conflict with their schedules, he would like to have a Commissioner attend. It was agreed and stated that BJ Selinder and Eleanor Lockwood are both willing to participate and follow that process. Commissioner Olsen made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted. Commissioner Erquiaga seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. CONSIDER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS- None. COMMISSIONER REPORTS: CHAIRMAN FREY: Chairman Frey said the Audit Committee met, which we have gone over already. He also participated in the Audit Committee for Nevada Works. He will be absent at the next meeting because the Wilderness Society is holding a fly-in on Senate Bill 1775, which would end up giving 25% of the rents and royalties for solar and wind projects on federal lands to the counties, so that work continues. They are paying for the trip back there to do the lobbying. It also extends the geothermal rents and royalties that we have been receiving for another year. All of our Congressional Delegation has been briefed on this matter, so he is offering to go to other Congressional leaders to gamer additional support for the bill. COMMISSIONER ERQUIAGA: Commissioner Erquiaga said he attended part of the property auction held by the Clerk/Treasurer's Office. It was a mixed bag of results there but she was able to sell some pieces of property. He attended the Hospital Board meeting on the 24th and other workshops and meetings mentioned that all of the board has attended. Last night, he attended the Bond Oversight Committee meeting, which Mr. Adams did an excellent job of running, as usual. COMMISSIONER OLSEN: Commissioner Olsen said he went to Candidate's Night on the 23rd, which was lively. On the 30th, the Social Services Advisory Committee met. He took the opportunity earlier to cruise by the Nazarene Church on a Thursday. He was going to go in and say hello to Pastor Slaton but, when he couldn't find a parking space within 75 yards of the building, he decided that Pastor Slaton would be too busy. He had been there a couple of years ago during one of their food distribution days and he would say there was, at least, triple the number of people there now who are accessing those services. It just speaks to our current economic environment that there are so many people making use of that program. On the 1st, he went over for Lena McQueen's non-reception for her retirement. He had a chance to speak to Sue Sevon to discuss the process where she is at now and the transfer for a future judge. He has also talked to a tire processor that was looking out in the Hazen area. Contrary to what is Don had said, it does give us great pause when somebody like this wants to come to our community. We kind of raked him over the coals and told him that it would be an uphill battle to get something like that approved. His son graduated, so that is his last child and he gets the checkered flag! He did pretty well receiving scholarships, which will help with college expenses. They held a party for him on Sunday.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 36 On Monday, the CWSD Manager Evaluation was done and they had a chance to talk about river flows and such. Our upstream neighbors are really short on water. We are very thankful that we have that reservoir. Also, the Truckee Canal had a couple of issues and was shut off last week. It sprung a couple of leaks in the Hazen area, so they are working to rectify those issues. INTERIM COUNTY MANAGER SELINDER: Interim County Manager Selinder said it seems like all he has been doing is attending meetings and spinning his wheels but, actually, he thinks it has been very good and he has had some very productive meetings with a lot of the staff members and Department Heads since he came on board, both learning about their current operations, their aspirations, and so forth. He hopes that we can give them some advice with regard to certain issues they have raised within their own organization, nothing of great consequence. He met with Rusty Jardine, Ernie Schank, and some of the members ofthe TCID board, as did Chairman Frey, to talk about a possible resolution ofTROA and a number of other outstanding issues. Perhaps Chairman Frey would like to discuss that. Chairman Frey said there have been some proposals to allow TROA or not provide opposition to implementation of TROA in exchange of other benefits, such as resolution of recoupment of monies for the Truckee Canal litigation. They are going through the process on that. If the board has any questions in that regard, since it does involve potential litigation, he advised them that those discussions are being held, so the board may want to hold a litigation meeting. He is not saying to set one but, if the other two Commissioners want one, that could be done to allow them to find out more of the details. Mr. Selinder said that option has been made through the District Attorney but he hasn't had a chance to discuss it or to see exactly when, where, and how it could be done but the board will be kept apprised of that. In addition to that, there was a follow-on meeting that took place in the next week with the BOR, Kenneth Parr, and some of the same players and Walt Winder. They discussed, essentially, the same issues as discussed prior. He will say that there was some hinting that the issues we had requested be addressed as part of a resolution to TROA were not encouraged, although they were not absolutely discouraged either. It is an interesting direction to come from. We will be receiving, although, so far, all we've had is notification that the Army Corps of Engineers will not require a permit for clearing of the drainage in the river as part of the ongoing clearing project. It doesn't pertain to any issues of a broader scope, i.e. flooding and flood control. He wanted the board to be aware that we will be receiving that. We have a little bit of money for that effort. As he has stated, he has been involved in one meeting after another. He also attended the Hospital Board meeting and the Permanent County Manager's workshop, any number of things that the board may have also attended. He thanked Craig Mingay for all of his hard work helping him out because it has been a God-send. CLERK/TREASURER HELTON: Clerk/Treasurer Helton said she had to sneak out this morning to go to the hospital to find out that her first grandchild is going to be a boy! She hasn't posted it on Facebook yet. As stated, the tax sale was held. She will be providing a report to the board at a future meeting. It was rather a disappointing tax sale as quite a few properties did not sell. They will be included in the next tax sale to be held.

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 37 The last day to vote for early voting in the Primary Election is tomorrow at 6:00 p.m. in the Commission Chambers. Election day is Tuesday. Tonight the annual meeting will be held at the Museum. DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MINGAY: Civil Deputy District Attorney Mingay had nothing to report. COMPTROLLER KAL T: Comptroller Kalt provided a written report and asked to address only a couple of items. He included a financial update and there is money in the bank. The auditors were here the other day doing some work, which went well. Yesterday, we received notification from the Department of Taxation concerning Enel and that is being evaluated now. At the next meeting, budgetary housekeeping items will be presented to the board. Things are going well. Mr. Selinder mentioned that he will be leaving this afternoon for the Central Nevada Regional Water Authority meeting in Ely. He will be gone through tomorrow. Around the 18th and 19th, he will back in Ely for the Legislative Committee on Public Lands where they will be talking about the legislative package being put together, which he felt was sufficiently important enough to attend and find out what is going on. Clerk/Treasurer Helton said she will be out of town for the next Commission meeting at the County Fiscal Officers Association meeting in Pioche, however, Erin Montalvo will present the Canvass of the Vote of the Primary Election. Deputy Clerk Moore reminded the board of the Employee Picnic being held on the 23rd. She is still looking for people to play kickball, to get in the dunk tank, or to volunteer their wives to help with activities. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chairman Frey inquired if there were any public comments on issues that were not listed on the Agenda but there were none. QUARTERLY JAIL INSPECTION Pursuant to N.R.S. 211.020, the Commissioners conducted the Quarterly Jail Inspection at the Churchill County Jail this afternoon following the Telephone Company meeting to inquire into the security ofthe jail and treatment and condition of the prisoners. A separate report of such inspection will be prepared. CLAIMS AND PAYROLL TRANSMITTALS The claims and payroll transmittals submitted for this meeting were reviewed and approved.

/Ill

/Ill

/Ill

/Ill

/Ill

/Ill

/Ill

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 38 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 12:06 p.m. APPROVED: ortnFre;chair - · ~...... -

" APPROVED: · ~ ....--..-. APPROVED :~ = Pete Olsen, Commissioner

Minutes of the Churchill County Commissioners' Meeting June 7, 2012 Page 39