RECAP BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS’ MEETINGJANUARY 19TH, 2023

RECAP BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS’ MEETING
JANUARY 19TH, 2023

The following are the main items discussed at the January 19^th Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) meeting:

***The BOCC reviewed and discussed approximately half of the Norms and Procedures. It will tackle the rest at the next BOCC meeting. It was a cordial and professional discussion but a couple of different philosophies were evident.

Transparency vs. Amiable
Section IV B (3) states, “Commissioners will avoid negative comments about other Commissioners.”
Section IV C (6) states, “Commissioners shall not publicly criticize an individual employee”

All Commissioners agreed that it is important to act civil and professional with each other and County staff and that personal attacks should not occur. However, these sections go much further. Does stating the reason you voted against the majority fall under these words? How about exposing abuse of power by a Commissioner or staff member?

County Manager, Patrick Cates and Commissioner Hales have told me that I have violated these sections in some of my newsletters. That may be the case; however, I believe transparency is the most important ingredient in government. Without it the public would never know what is happening, there would be no checks and balances, and the process would be ripe for abuse. To me, transparency will always win out.

The Assistant District Attorney is reviewing different wording for these Sections and he will present the same at a later BOCC meeting.

Helping Constituents vs. Micro-Managing
Section IV C (9) states, “County Commissioners shall not get involved in administrative functions. The Board collectively establishes policies that are then implemented by the County Manager”.

Commissioners Hales and Rice passionately condemned any Commissioner who would violate this provision. I am not sure if they were talking about me but Chairman Gardner and County Manager Cates have complained that I micro-manage administrative business when I bring to their attention problems raised by my constituents.

As many of you know, I respond to every email and call I receive, and more importantly, I try to help resolve each of the problems raised by my constituents. I believe strongly that this is an important job of any public servant. I have never demanded that staff take certain action but rather requested staff to try and find a solution to the problem.

On one occasion, when staff told me there was nothing they could do (paving a road which hadn’t been paved in 40 years) I requested that this matter be brought before the Board for a vote. Miraculously, the road was paved. I believe that if staff is not implementing Board policy, the Board can collectively vote to make them do so. If not, then what good is any policy.

Enforcement of Norms and Procedures
I suggested that the Assistant District Attorney enforce the Norms and Procedures instead of the Chair. My reasoning was that if the Chair violates the Norms and Procedures he won’t enforce the provisions. Commissioners Hale and Rice were against this as was the Assistant District Attorney.

***The BOCC voted 4-1 to approve a contract with Tate Snyder Kimsey Architects, Ltd (TSK) to complete the engineering and design for the new Douglas County Judicial Center in an amount not-to-exceed $3,493,000.

I was the lone dissent. I voted against this item because I think the amount of the contract is high and the County did not get any other bids to compare it. I believe it is paramount that the County Commissioners closely examine every expense, especially with a pending Recession coming.

In the meeting, County staff stated that the contract was less than 10% of the total construction cost and that the industry standard for this work is between 10-15%. However, my experience in the development business is that the amount paid for this type of work is a higher percentage for smaller jobs and a lower percent for larger jobs, lower than 10%. This is the largest job the County has endeavored.

County staff stated at the meeting that Nevada law prevents them from comparing the cost for professional work. They could not provide the statute at the meeting. After the meeting, staff emailed the Commissioners Nevada Administrative Code Section 623.800 which supports their statement.

I understand the importance in hiring top professionals to do this work but why can’t there be multiple bids from top professionals to assure a reasonable cost. This is another example of government not being fiscally responsible with your money.

*** The BOCC’s voted unanimously to amend the County Code to allow manufactured homes to be used as an accessory dwelling where the primary residence is a manufactured home within the Rural Agriculture – 5-acre zone.

Town Hall- I wanted to thank the people who attended my first Town Hall of 2023. I hope it was worth your time.

Retraction Part II- In my Wednesday newsletter, I attributed a statement made in the Record Courier to the Chairwoman of the VHR Advisory Board, Mickie Hempler. I was wrong. Ms. Hempler did not make the statement, but rather, the writer Kurt Hildebrand did. I missed the quotation mark at the end of Ms. Hempler’s statement. I apologize to Ms. Hempler. I must do better!