October 2, 2018

Commissioner Koenig

said on page 3 the gentleman’s name was Terry Svejda, not Jerry. October 2, 2018 4. For Possible Action Discussion and deliberation of the minutes of the joint meeting of the Nye County Board of Commissioners, Board of Highw ay Commissioners, Licensing and Liquor Board, Board of Health, the Govern ing Body of the Unincorporated Town of Pahrump, the Governing Body of the Unincorporated Towns of Beatty, Belmont, Gabbs, Manhattan, and Railroad Valley, and the Board of Trustees for the Pahrump Pool District, on September 4, 2018-Cont’d.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to approve with that correction; second ed by

Commissioner Schinhofen

; 4 yeas.

Commissioner Wichman

explained that licensing at this time remained with the Sheriff’s Office as did the work cards. The administration of licensing would move to Administration after three ordinance changes. Lorina Dellinger advised those were in progress and they were set up to take the applications, but the work cards remained with the Sheriff’s Office.

Commissioner Wichman

then stated marijuana taxes covered the cost of services Like police, licensing, and code compliance, none of which were provided in Amarg osa Valley. The Department of taxation (DTAX) provided guidance in the applica tion of those revenues and Commissioner Wichman thought perhaps John Bosta failed to frame his question to the LCB in that context. Commissioner Wichman then told Dawn Duncan she could not have it both ways. Either Commissioner Wichman was always at the Love Ranch or she was never there, however, on Friday she did receive verific ation of compliance for the Love Ranch. Next, Commissioner Wichman advised she was asked to participate as a panel member for the annual mineral exploration summi t program to be held at the Atlantis Casino in Reno on October 9, 2018. She also mentioned to those who were coming into the new positions on the Commission the Association of Counties annual conference on November 13, 2018. It would be a full day of workshops which was a process by which one could get their public officia l credentials. Addressing Dwight Lilly, Commissioner Schinhofen reminded him they had talked before and he would be happy to help Mr. Lilly file a code compliance compla int on the barking dogs. He also encouraged Mr. Lilly to look at the audited reports for the last few years about how much money the Town of Pahrump had saved since the Board took over. As to the advisory board, Commissioner Schinhofen said he had asked Tim October 2, 2018 6. Commissioners’IManagers Comments (This item limited to announcements or topicslissues proposed for future workshopsiagendas)-Cont’d. Sutton and the previous County Manager numerous times for an advisory board, but there had not been a motion from the Board to get one.

Commissioner Schinhofen

then recited the numerous Dennis Hot violations beginning June. 2016, when the Commission raised the fees on brothel owners for the first time in living memory and Mr. Hot’s payment was late. The Commission did not revoke his license then and gave him a chance. Commissioner Schinhoten was the one who made the motion to extend and give Mr. Hof another two weeks to comply with the signage ordnances, which Mr. Hot was still in violation of today. At the October 1, 2016, meeting Commissioner Schinhoten made the motion to approve Mr. Hot’s licenses again although he was still in violation. Sheriff’s Office staff lied to Commissioner Schinhofen and told him all the paperwork was in order and it was not. In August, 2017, the issues with his trailers not being stickered and having been moved and moditied was found, so Mr. Hot knew from August. When the show cause was scheduled in February, 2018, it had to be put off for two weeks because Mr. Hof’s attorney could not make that day. When the show cause hearing was tinally held Mr. Hot was tound guilty of those issues. He had also violated the codes by placing an ad in the Chamber magazine as well as driving campaign mobile billboards all around town even though he was noticed on March 26, 2018, that would now be a Code violation. Commissione r Schinhofen stated the people were out of work because Mr. Hot thought he was above the law. Those were the absolute tacts, but people could go ahead and continue to believe Mr. Hof’s churlish and childish behavior.

Commissioner Wichman

said when she received the e-mail on the Amargosa Farm Road issue she torwarded it to the Public Works Department as well as to one of the Commissioners on the RTC. She explained there was an application process for lining up the roads that people had asked for. TIMED ITEMS

Commissioner Schinhofen

assumed the Chair of the Board of Highway Commissioners. October 2, 2018

Commissioner Wichman

thanked the crew for the help with the roads in the northern portion of the County.

Commissioner Koenig

expressed his gratitude for fixing the ripples on Blagg.

Commissioner Schinhofen

asked if the contractor was doing the final lifts on Homestead or if they were waiting for the rain to pass.

Mr. Christensen

said they were getting ready and would like to start paving tomorrow.

Commissioner Schinhofen

informed the general public they could report potholes or road concerns to the County Road Department on-line via the Nye County Web site or they could talk to their Commissioner.

Commissioner Koenig

assumed the Chair of the Board of County Commissioners. SITTING AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF UNINCORPORATED TOWNS OF BEATTY, BELMONT, GABBS, MANHATTAN, AND RAILROAD VALLEY BEATTY

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to approve; seconded by Commissioner Schinhofen; 4 yeas. SITTING AS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS These are items that Staff recommends for approval. The Board reserves the right to move any consent agenda item to the regular segment of the agenda should issues arise that need to be addressed. Discussion of any item from the Consent Agenda Items that needs review before a decision is made.

Commissioner Wichman

made motion to approve items 10 and 11; seconded by

Commissioner Schinhofen

; 4 yeas. October 2, 2018

Commissioner Wichman

made motion to approve items 10 and 11; seconded by

Commissioner Schinhofen

; 4 yeas. John Bosta pointed out that the Chairman had eliminated public comment on item 10.

Commissioner Koenig

said he had asked for further discussion and no one came up.

Mr. Bosta

said Commissioner Koenig moved too fast and if he did not allow public comment it was an Open Meeting Law violation as the item was for possible action.

Commissioner Koenig

disagreed and said he did not have to have public comment on every agenda item. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

Commissioner Wichman

explained this Tn-County Cooperative Agreement had been in effect since 1999 and it helped the County maintain what it was required to do by law. Minor changes were required so it needed to come back to the Commissioners for signature. She said normally this agreement was seen once every ten years.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to approve; seconded by Commissioner Schinhofen; 4 yeas.

Commissioner Wichman

asked Mr. Sutton if he was surprised by anything after reading the back-up.

Mr. Sutton

said he was surprised by how overwhelmingly positive the comments were, and he agreed with some of the things that were mentioned that he could improve on.

Commissioner Wichman

said she would like to see Mr. Sutton’s self assessment in the future. She stated she appreciated the job he had done and the way he had represented Nye County.

Commissioner Cox

felt Mr. Sutton had done a very good job and commented how she never graded to the highest expectation as things changed on a daily basis. She did have a problem with the way it was laid out as it was hard to choose answers as there were so many items clumped together. She would rather see them separated and suggested bullet points next year.

Commissioner Schinhofen

said Mr. Sutton had met every goal that Commissioner Schinhofen had set for him.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to approve; seconded by Commissioner Schinhofen. October 2, 2018 16. For Possible Action Discussion and deliberation regarding 1) the Annual Evaluation of the County Manager; and 2) determination that the County Manager’s performance has been satisfactory-Cont’d. Dwight Lilly said Mr. Sutton had been nothing but a gentleman, professional and helpful. He hoped Mr. Sutton stuck around for a long time. John Bosta said he respected what Mr. Sutton had done, but he questioned the scale of 1 through 12 and what it meant. He also mentioned the person who made the report was not identified and just used

Mrs. ShamreH

explained the evaluations went out to 18 individuals who responded to the evaluation using first person and turned it in confidentially so there were no names of who submitted them. The numbers on the report were the scores given on the individual areas. i.e., the very first one says leadership and seven of the 17 people who responded said exceeded expectations and ten said met expectations.

Sheriff Wehrly

was present. Maria Ziotek said it was the recommendation of the District Attorney’s Office that items 10 and 11 should be reopened for public comment. 10. For Possible Action — Approval of Elected Official Collection Report. This item was reopened for public comment per legal advice. John Bosta stated there was no indication in the report of the revenue collected for marijuana. If it was in the report it was hidden under some other category. SHERIFF

Commissioner Koenig

confirmed with Mr. Waggoner that his recommendation was a 90 day temporary extension. October 2, 2018 17. For Possible Action Discussion and deliberation regarding a renewal of a WholesalelRetail Fireworks Permit for Ninja Fireworks, LLC dba Blackjack Fireworks. Anthony Mckoy Applicant-Cont’d.

Commissioner Schinhofen

made a motion to give a 90-day extension for Blackjack Fireworks, Anthony McCoy, applicant; seconded by Commissioner Wichman.

Commissioner Schinhofen

commented that he and Mr. Waggoner talked about this and that they had operated this way for years. He understood grandfathering and if a use was expanded a CUP would be required, but he did not know that this would be done in 90 days.

Commissioner Cox

did not understand why these things were being lumped together. She said the fact they came to renew their license had nothing to do with zoning so she felt like the Board was trying to get a hold on them. Commissioner Cox did not see why their permit could not be renewed for the year and they could still work this out with planning. Commissioner Cox would not support the motion for that reason, but she would like to see a new motion giving them their license and having them work it out with planning and zoning.

Commissioner Koenig

thought one of the problems was Mr. McCoy was in China and he was not available to talk to Planning about the problem. If he was here

Commissioner Koenig

thought the problem would be fixed by now.

Commissioner Cox

agreed that something needed to be done with the containers, but she wanted them to feel secure with the fact that the County would not shut down their business in three months because they did not move fast enough.

Mr. Waggoner

stated his goal would be to get the process started, which was the purpose for the 90-day extension. He completely agreed that 90 days would not be sufficient to complete it, but he definitely thought it was sufficient to get an action plan, an agreement, and a plan of action in motion even if it took six or twelve months. He added that would be his recommendation for any license brought before the Board to get the process started. There were also code compliance issues that needed to be addressed. Dwight Lilly talked about a warehouse of fireworks where he used to live that blew up and thought the County might want to do some research on that. That company had been there for decades and the reason given for the explosion was they had certain types of fireworks next to other types and somehow spontaneous combustion happened. Mr. Lilly said this was an issue with health, safety and public welfare under the Building and Planning Department and hoped the Board would consider it seriously.

Sheriff Wehrly

said they were asking for the 90 days to get a handle on explosive storage and having the containers marked correctly. October 2, 2018 17. For Possible Action Discussion and deliberation regarding a renewal of a Wholesale/Retail Fireworks Permit for Ninia Fireworks, LLC dba Blackjack Fireworks. Anthony McKoy Applicant-Cont’d. Fire Chief Scott Lewis said he did not want anyone leaving the meeting thinking those containers had not been inspected. The Fire Marshal did inspections on all properties and it was 1.4 product, not 1.3. Doug Burda said public safety was always of the utmost concern and he emphasized Fire Chief Lewis comment that the fireworks being discussed were of the consumer variety, not display variety, and did not contain any dynamite.

Commissioner Schinhofen

made a motion to allow Justice Jasperson to do so; seconded by Commissioner Wichman; 4 yeas.

Commissioner Schinhofen

said this was the purpose of the chief deputy, to fill in if someone had to step down.

Commissioner Schinhofen

made a motion to appoint the Chief Deputy Treasurer to this position until December 31, 2018, that she be paid as Treasurer, and on December 31, 2018, that would be rolled back; seconded by Commissioner Wichman; 4 yeas. October 2, 2018 FINANCE

Commissioner Koenig

asked what was causing that additional workload.

Mrs. Rucker

explained that while the new cars would help in time, there would be an increase in workload initially to accomplish the transition. She then reviewed the reasons for the overages shown for Buildings & Grounds, Beatty Justice Court, and the Sheriff’s Office and advised she would bring items forward to correct those. Mrs. Rucker asked the Board if they would like to see the Sheriff’s Office broken down by department as right now it was just lumped into the Sheriff’s Office.

Commissioner Wichman

thought that would be helpful. John Bosta said he did not see any item for the marijuana taxes and fees and asked where that amount could be found.

Mrs. Rucker

explained this report was a summary of all revenues received by the Nye County general fund so that revenue was rolled up into the first page of the budget to actual revenue report. She would provide Mr. Bosta with a breakdown of the summary of revenues.

Commissioner Schinhofen

made a motion to 1) accept the response and 2) provide direction to staff to enter into fee negotiations to be funded from the general fund; seconded by Commissioner Wichman.

Commissioner Cox

asked if the County would have a permanent County surveyor as she thought the County already had one. Danielle McKee, Grants and Contracts Manager, explained the County surveyor did review and approval of maps. The County had another surveyor for several years who worked for Atkins. He resigned from the position so this was to replace him. She had October 2, 2018 22. For Possible Action Discussion and deliberation regarding RFQ: 2018-12 County Surveyor: 1.) Accept the response from Farr West Engineering; and 2) provide direction to staff to enter into fee negotiations, to be funded from Fund 10101 General-Cont’d. conversations with Tim Dahi and Brett Waggoner and this was a required position the County had to maintain. It was also separate from the one in Tonopah. Brett Waggoner added that Public Works had a County surveyor on staff for in-house use, but this was a position required by NRS for parcel maps or certificates of amendment that had to be reviewed and approved by a licensed surveyor.

Commissioner Cox

asked why a job search was not done to hire someone for that position, to which Ms. McKee responded that this was not a County employee. This was an outside surveyor the County was required to have by NRS.

Mr. Waggoner

added there was no one on staff capable of doing what this outside contractor did.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to accept the donation, approve the request to accept the assignment, and approve the transfer with assumption of the financial responsibility; seconded by Commissioner Schinhofen; 4 yeas. October 2, 2018

Commissioner Schinhofen

made a motion based on staff recommendation to approve the cooperative agreement between Nye County and SNACC with Brad Adams as the primary Nye County representative voting member and Tim White as the alternate; seconded by Commissioner Wichman. John Bosta said he understood there were 200 radios and each radio had to pay $1,460.00 for a total cost of $292,000.00. He pointed out that neither the agreement nor the back-up discussed that cost and thought the motion should mention that. IT Director Brad Adams explained the cost associated with this cooperative agreement was for new buy-ins, but that had been reduced, so there was no new cost with this new agreement.

Commissioner Schinhofen

said his motion stood.

Commissioner Wichman

made a motion to approve; seconded by Commissioner Schinhofen; 4 yeas.

Commissioner Schinhofen

was not present. Doug Varin asked the Commission why it raised the fee on an inspection permit by 400% and why the individuals or entities directly affected by that decision were not notified until after it was done.

Commissioner Koenig

stated that was done at a public meeting in front of everyone. October 2, 2018

Commissioner Cox

agreed with Mr. Varin and thought that should be considered in the future. In the meantime if he had an issue with it she said he should bring something forward. John Bosta thanked Maria Ziotek for instructing the Chairman to reopen item 10.

Commissioner Koenig

adjourned the meeting. APPROVED this ATTEST: Of cif 2018. 1uty STATE OF NE’JADA irr,isrxrivu C }NI\1 ISSI’ )\ 775, (‘SI-IS H I \‘‘)\ iRJERS(p\ 41w’,,H’i nd,: LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL BUREAU Rwt C.-rtO’s [i;n.d- ‘‘. ‘Vt,,,, INIIRINI FI\:\>.([* (‘i\I\tlI{LI ‘‘(‘‘4”1I 401 S CARSON S rREET II II t’ ‘II ,! S’,.:,’r C\C4SO’: CITY NEVADA Pfl731 -4717 ‘{&‘t.S’:r-’. (‘,:.,‘4’uS’ I” nI’. J-’:c- I-,:,;! 1 - RN K Ii-’ /J’.,:.,, LRI.)’’rSfell,lde ( -,.‘.dF ,;:-c, ,4 1? f.’.-:- -zr ,j.’-r i75 ‘‘‘5,,’ 5 Mi’iI-EL , SiF\’\k. R,;erz’;fi,.-,.’,Vc. Septeiii her 2 I. 201 8 Senator ‘etc (ioieoechea PO. Box 97 l-:tireka. Nevada 80316—0097 )ear Senator ( ioieoecltea: You hake asked this olbee two tlliestions concerilinu the autliorits’ of the hoard ci’ count> commissioners cia count>’ to impose and collect a business license fee or tax on marijuana estahlishnlents anti medical marijuana est:il’Iishinents located in the count>. I he iniormation provided to tins otlice nd caic that the boards of county coTnTllIssioIler7 ol certain emnties have enacted oftlillaltees imposille business license lees and taxes on inarijuantt establislunents and medical narijuwia establishments in those couiities. in response to the enactment ci tIice orclinance. questions have been raised about the atithorit> olthese I’uail ol county commissioners to impose btisuie,,s license heer’ and taxes on mail juanu estabhislittietits and medical marijuana establishments located in tiancorporated towns anti the use ot’the retenne collected ;‘om such biish:ess license fees and taxes l:irst. >ou have asked this ollice \‘Jlethel the board of county commissioners ota cotinR ma> impose a business tccnse fee or tax on nnlrijtl.ma establi>nillenls and medical nlar:jtiana establishments loeate:I in all unincorporaletl to’aii in the county. Scc.’itl. ha hoard ofcolltlt\ conlnlissiollcrs is authorized to impose a business license tee or lax on such estah1ishnlents. you have asked tins oilice whether the board ol citnit>’ c’ninnssioners na>’ require the revenue collected from such a business license Ice or tax to be deposited in the court” general lund and i:sed Lw the sole benefit of the count’ - answer our questions. we will examine [he pros isions of: (I) sections 15 and II) I 8.5 of Senate Bill No. 487 of the 2017 Session ol the Nevada legislature to determine the authc’i ity of the hoard of county commissioners ola county to impose a business ‘‘514’ S. ATTACHMENT 1 Senator Pete (;clieoeehca September 21. 2Q18 Rice 2 ICCflSC lee or tax on a marijuana esntb!ishnient or nedca1 i1arijcian;i estIiisiinieni located ii an unincolporatcu to;n in Ihe count\ and (2) chaater 2(9 nfNRS cocriiinc the use of re eliuc collected irotii lees or taxes imposed iii an it incorporated to\\ I). l)ISCLSS ION I. Authoiitv of the Board of Count; (‘omnhissioners of t Count; Eu Irnpoc a Business license Fee or Ia on a 1arijuana F(abiishment or Niecijeal Niarijutina Fstahlislinient Located in an i_iiincorporalcci low ii in the Count; [he Inst issue ve o,ill address is \\heihcr inc nard ocoiiit ccniiilissitme:s max impose a business lIcense CC or tax on a inari;tlana cstabIisI:iieiit or medical iiarItiaiia e,Lt’IisIlalcIit located i an unmcorpratcd icn in the countx. In relex alit part. sectIon 15 ol513487. \\IlIcil governs the artthcrit of the board cl county coniiiiissioiiers ola count; to impose a business license tax ii areas ol the count; outside ol incorpoiated cities and towns, states: 1zcgujis!ther\visenvvided in tis section. a hoard ol’ county csnilsionersshaiUihujmse or collect a license_ta\lorreVeiiucor Iorreciilniioiiortorbotli revenue anti reunlation.onaniarijtinna 2. lxcept as otlicrx HC provtued in subsection 3. ii bc’ardoictintv eomniissioners may ix. impose and_eoIlectalldenscizi\Itioe\ciiuecirIo: reuulation.orlorbothrevciiue_aiiclreu’iiationonaniarijci;iiia establ isIinent or medical ntaijjuana esiabhshment located in the county cities and towns as a: (a) I lat flee: (b) Percentage ol the gross rexentie of the marijuana establislittietit or medical niarijutaita esmabiislunent: or (e) ( ‘ottibimiaticin ota hat fee and a percentage of gross revenue oh he nlarijtmana establislmient or medical marijuana eslablisliinent. 3. lime toal aillotini of a licenc lax imposed on a mn:irmiut:Ina estahlisii:nent or medical marijuana estabhisiniieiit porsucit to >ub5ecto;i 2. regardless of \vlietlier the license tax is imposed in the firm described iii paragrajill Ia). (N) or mc) of subsection 2. iliuSi not exceed 3 percent (If the cross reVe!lIie oh the niarijunmna esmablishniert or miiedieal 11.! donna estaill tslillleiit. as appl cable. NI{S 244.35253 t liuphasis added) 1 his section general!; prohibits it board of cotttmts eommiiissioners irom imposing a “license tax’’ on a marijuana establisllmiient or medical niarijumana esiablisliiiient located in tile county except in accordance \\itli tile section. I oxexer. the section then auitluri,es a board ofcotmntv coinniissiclmlers to impose a license tax” oii a marijuana establishment or medical marijuana establishment located in Senator Pete Goicoechca September 2 I. 20! 8 the county hut “outside ol’ the limits 0! incorporated cities and towns, subject to certain limitations on the amount ol the license tax. Section I 8.5 of Sfl487 contains similar languae hut govcrn.s the imposition CLI business license tax on marijuana establishments and medical marijuana establishments in unincorporated towns. In relevant pail. section 18.5 of 513437 states: I. Exe t as oiher’aise provided in this section. the lovn board or shall not fix or establishment located witlit n the lo\s ii. 2. I xcepl as otherwise provided iii subsection 3. III ±2pij2pIIripx board ol count commi rs w’uy collect a license tax onamarijtiana establishment armcchcal mcnjjuana establishment located with n the town as a: (a) Flat fee: (h) Percentage of the gross revenue of the marijuana establishment or medical marijuana establishment: or (cI Combination cia lInt ftc and a percentage of gross revenue of the marijuana establishment or medical marijuana establishment. 3. Ihe total amount ofa license tax imposed on a marijuana establishment or medical marijtiana establishment pu suant to subsection 2. regardless of whether the license tax is imposed iii the form described in paracraph (a). (h) or (c) ol subsection 2. must not exceed 3 percent of the moss re enue ot the niarijttana establishment or medical matijuana establishment, as applicable. NRS 2ô). 183 (Emphasis mltled. 1 his section generally prohibits the town board or board of counts commissioners Loin imposine a”lic ense tax” on a iuarijtmana establishment or medical marijuana establislmnient located in an unincorporated town except in accordance w jIlt the section. I hnvever. the section then authorizes a town board or board oicount comnussiomiers to impose a “license tax” on a marijuana establishment or medical marjtiatict establishment located in an unincorporated town, subject to certain limitations on the amount ol the license tax. Because sections 15 and 18.5 of 513487 govern the authority eta board olcountv commissioner to impose a business license tax on marijuana establishments and medical marijuana establishments located. we must consider he language of those sections to determine: (A) whether these sections govern the imposition ot both a business license lee and a business license tax evcn though the language of these sections rele r only to a business license ‘‘tax:” and (B) whether these sections authorize the board oicotmntv commissioners of a county to impose a business license fee or tax on marijuana establishments and medical marijuana establishments located in an unincorporated to\s n in the county. Senator Pew ( ;uicoecliea September21 2D IS R 4 A. Even Iliough Sections 15 and 18.5 of S114S7 Refer to a Business I Jeense ak,’’ 11w Pt’i, sinus of Tliosc Sections Apply to Business License Fees and Taxes. In titldresInu the issue of s’. hether an exaction amounts to a lax or a fee, courts ha e found that ‘‘INc nature ol’ihe tax or charge that a la\% imposes is not determined he the label i\ en ii it bitt b\ its operati tig iticitletice.” State yJ.kdeuxs. 973 P.2d 736. 74 I ill I I nit] nil quol tic’I1 otiiitttd I (c ttlnL c iRol I lunt.j,toij B icon 473 S I 2d 743, 752 1W. Vs. l’)96 t”lt is a \\elI-tligh non ersal principle that courts will deternitne antI elassil\ taxation tin the basis of realities. rather than what the tax is called in the taxing sitititte or ordinance.”’ (clilotitlu jpklc\jfl\J2fhuntmuton. 58 S.J.2d 75i, 7X1 \V. Va. I ‘)50))i: Itilleiscin (‘ofleec (itv of Boston. 4b2 N.E.2d I (tQS, 11)15 (MaNS. )X4) (e\plamiti that itititnatet>. “lie nature ota tuncta exaclloti must he determined b\ its operation ra:lier tItan its specially clesetiptixe phrase” i internal ctUotatioii Ohilittec! I iterefhre. the hid that the section 15 and I .5 of 513487 label the exaction as a busine5 I:cense ‘tax’’ is nut deterininaine cit \‘lietlici the liuiutiaue authorizes onl\ a tax or s hetl er the Itniuntige atitltorizes both a lee atid a tax. he Nevada Supreme Court has explatned the di hterence between a tax md a hee as lhfots: \n exaction ci moneY or the purpose of uenerattnu re\enee is a tax. \k ide a lax is coniptil’or and it entitles the tltxpa\er to receive nithinc except the govertiniental rieins etito’ ccl liv all citizens, a user tee is optional and applies to a specilie cli 11Cc hot lilt iis._ ol ptthltcl pio’ tdLtl 5th c Is i\\ itch 0 lpj\_IJoit 127 Ne. Ads. op. 24. 255 P.3d 247. 256 2t)l I) (citations oniitted. 1 bus. ‘when it appears hom the Act itseif that rexenue is its main ohiective. and the a:iiounl of the tax supports that thetr, the enactment is a revenue measure. Ishat 258 (quoting IiLi Cmv. Contractors Assti l)ottulas (‘ntv.. 112 \ev. 1452. l45c) (1996)). l3 contrast. “a . declared or ,bt cbs pitrptlse to regtii;tte tends to establish an exaction as a plt’i ltee:isine and eeatlatoi tee. Southern Nexada lit’e I micr\riters’ :\SsOciation . City ol is \ is 74 \ I6 I t I Qs’, (c totit Vt U 0// i C /7”)) ‘/U,?’ Vol. ), see. 2615. pace 26) on application of these actors It) the lanuitage of sw 15 ii SB’1X7. the intiioi iL tO tml’osc a business license” tax” and the littittations on that aut’Ii:it\ applY to an exaction lalijeti a hitsittess license “te” hs the entity ciiacJng the ordinance imposing the ‘cc. Because section 15 ofSI34X7 authoti es the imptisdion ofa httstness lieetise” tax br ret entie or lhr regulation, or hr icih c ctiue and rcettlatioii,” on marijuana estahlishtneiits and tnedical mati tiatta establislitnents. the section govertis an exLhcttoti or the purpose 01’ rcgtilatioti and, thus. authorizes and governs the imposition ofa busitiess lteense lee as well ast hitsiness license tax in certain areas ola countY. NRS 244.35253 Ettipltasis added). cii tiatault section 18.5 of 5)3457 does not state that the business license “tax” atithoried h that section is or t’c’\etnte or regttlatioti or both reventte and regttlation.” the application oftlte rules ot statutory constrttction require the section to he read to authorize and govern both basiness Iieetise lees and taxes ittiposed on marijuana Senator Pete Goicoecliea September 2 I 201 8 esiabli shments and medical niarij uatia estahi shments located in ufli neorporated tow ns. NRS 269.l83. When a court reads and interprets the plain languace ola statute. the court must also consider the provisions of the statute ‘‘as a whole so as to read them in a wa> that would not render words or phrases superfluous or male a provision nugatory. Areuellov. .Suose_,Sation. Inc.. 127 Ne\ .365. 370 (20l I). Subsection 6 of sectain I 8.5 of .513487 relers to a “person who obtains a business license described in this section.” NRS 269.1 83. [bus. reading section I 8.5 of Sf3487 as a whole, the section nuts! he construed to atithorize the issuance of business licenses to marijuana establishments and medical marijuana establishments located iii tiaiiicorporaied towns In addition. paragrIi th of’subsectton 4 of that section refers to. and imposes limitations on. at) initta1 application ke br the issuance ota ‘‘business license.’’ NRS 269.183. If the language otseetion 8.5 cl 513487 was interprctcd to authorze the i:nptlsirion (iloai\ a htishiess iceiisc tax, a business license lee to cover the cost of licensing nlaritLi:nia cstahlishntcats and medical nariiuin:i cswbIishricnts could not be nnposcd. Ic) \ oid such a result that oulcl render other angtiage oi the section superfluous. section I KS of 513487 niusi he read to authod,c and govern the imposition ota business license lee as well as a business license “tax.” Because the plain lwiguagc of section IS ofSll4S7 reflrs to a “tax br revenue or rcuulatioi, or both revenue and regulation.’ that section must be read to authorize and eos em the inposition ol’busniess Icense fles. NRS 244,35253. In addition, reading section 1 KS of 513—187 as a whole, that section must be read to atitliori,e arid govern the rmnostion of htisinecs license es so as to a’ oid i’enderinu superfluous the reft’rences in that section to business iccnses’ind initial application les lbr business licenses. I bus. based on the plain language of sections IS and 18.5 of s13$X; anl the rules oI’stattttor;. it is the opinion of this olilee that sections 15 and 18.5 of’ 513487 authorize and goscr:i the imposition of both business license lees and business license taxes on mariiualia establishments and niedicai marijtiana establishments. Ii, lire Board of (:ooriIv (‘ornnlissioncrs of a (‘otintv is Authotized to Inpose a BIJSII)C%S Licerist’ FCC ‘1’ 1)11 fi Marijuana Vstahiisliment or Niedical Marijuana Kstahlisliinent I.oualcd iii an LIlitlC(fl’pnrated Town L’rilcss fire ‘l’owir Board Form af’ Ctnc’r’nnient is Established fur the I. riirieorporaletl [ow ii. As stated aboc, the plain lanauage of sections IS and 18.5 of 5(3487, ‘espectieIv. govern the imposition ot a business license lbc or tax on inariiuLnla establishments and medical riiuiiRlana establisluiterits located in areas oUt count; outside of incorporated cities and tow as arid iii trnincntpoi’ated towns, ‘l’litis. to deteriiiine vIiethier a board of eottntv ccuuitlissioncrs is authorized to impose a business license lee or tax on a narijitatla establislnncnt or medical marijuana establishment located iii an unincorporated town, we will examine the language of both of these sections. The plain language of subsection I of 513487 prohibits a board olcountv conini issioneis loin nliposi ng a busi ness license fee or tax on a marijuana establ i slitnent or medical marijuana establishment. NRS 244.35253. I lo\vever, the plain language of Senanr I ‘etc C ;oicoechea September Dl. DCIX lkwe ( sttiisecti,n 2 of section 15 of 513487 then authori,est he hoard oicctint\ commissioners ota count’ to impose a htisiness license lee or tax on “marijuana establishments and mecte;il tnartj ua:ia establishments located in Ill: count>’ outs:de the limits oHncoq orated cries and towns. \RS 244.35253. Thas. under the pla;n hingittige oh seetton 15 o; 513457. the hoard ofeoumit> ctunmissioners is on!’ authorized to inIjlosc a littsuiess license lee or tax on marijuana establishments or medical marijuana estahlishtiiemiis located outside of meorpotated cities and towns and is proluhiteI Irom itliptlstne a license lee or tax on marijuana establishments and medical marijuana establishinietits located in towns. Because an unincorporated town is a town.” the plain language of section 5 of 513487 prohibits the board ol’cotttitv eotlimnissioners ola count> from imposing a business license fee or tax on marijuana establishments and medical marijuana establishments located in an unincorporated town in lie count’: Ihe concltmHotl th0t sectiotl 15 of 513487 does not grant autlniritv to a hoard of cotitit> cotilnltssio:iers to noose a license tee or ta.\ on marijuana establishments and medical marijuana estahli>hinients located in an unincorporated towit mc unported b> a well-established rules of stattiturv construction. One such rue retlui’es eo;tt-ts to interpret a rule or statute “in harmon’: w th Oner rules and statutes anti to eonslrt;e statutes stich nat to part of the statute is rendered tweator> or turned to mere surplitsage All os\. I lorizoti (‘otllnllutlities. Inc 122 Ne’:. 409. 4 8 (2006), \\‘ltile section 15 of 513487 . authorizes the board ofeourti> eommitissioners ola counts to impose :i license tee or tax on marijuana establishments and medical marijuana establishment located in the count> hut outside of incorporated cities and towns. section 18.5 ofSB487 speeihcallv governs the authority to inpose a license fee or tax on marijuana establislititetits and medical tilnriiuana estztbhishtnents located in tinincotporatcd towns. Speeihicallv. section I 8.5 ‘l’ S134X7 authorizes the board oh eottnt> commissioners ola count> in w llich art tinmeorporated town is located or the town hoard of an incorporated town to itnpmlse a Iteense lee or tax on marijuana establish etit and tttedtcal ll:trijtrtfla estnl’hishitweits located in the tncorpo’ated town. II section iS of 513487 was to he itterpieted to authorize the hoard of county commissioners on a county to impose i license lee or tax on t1fltriii.n),i estai’lisntients amid medical marijuana c’t:iblNlttilcnts loca’ed in iitiincorporatcd towns, the legislature would tot have needcd to enact section I 5.5 of 51315, to uçi eril tile imnptbition or such license lees or taxes it i ‘t’;’’rt:cl ttwts and section I 55 would lie tuiiiel itiro ‘mere srirplusacc. “lu avoid an ititer1’retation that turns section 8.5 ofSB4S7 into ‘there surplusage. section IS of 511487 twist lie interpreted such that the section does not authorize the hoard ol count’: eotntitissioners oh a cortntv to impose a license fee or tax on narijttatia estahlislitnetnts and medical mttrij nana estahi i sluiieitts located in uni ncorporatecl towtis n the coo tit I la\ ing concluded that seetiotl IS ol 513487 does not authorize tile board of cotint> commissioners of a county to impose a husitless license tee or lax ott marijuana es:ahhslimeti:sati:d thledical marijuana establishments located itt unincorporated tO\\lls in the count’, we wiN now examine wmtetler section 18.5 o Sf348? authorizes tile board of count> e’ittttiissloncrs to inpose such a hiusi:iess license fee or tax. As stated above. Senator Pete Goicoechea September 21, 2012 subject to certain limitations on the amount ofilie business license lee or tax. subsection 2 of section 18.5 itithori,’cs the tow a hoard “or’ board ol county commissioners in any unincorporated town to “lix and collect a license tax on a marijuana estahhshment or nediLal iltIlijllana establishment located within the town. NRS 269.183. Thus. based on the plain langnae ol this provision. the authority to impose a business license be or tax on marijuana estaolishments and medical marijuana establishments in an unincorplaled to\k n is grinieci to: (1) the town hoard: or (2) the hoard nfcountv ctinlntssiolers (If the count’ in \\hicll the unincorporated town is located, \ccorling to the Seada Supreme (.‘ottrt. ‘the word ‘Or’ is tspicaHv used to connect phrases or clauses eptcsentit;e alternatives.” l)ezzani Kern & Assocs.. lid., . i 34 \ev. :\dv. Up. 9 PP (tioti lg (oast Hotels & Casinos, Inc.. 117 Nev. 835, 841 (2(11)1 0. \ court “pres.male:s that ‘or is used in a statute disiunc: ivelv unless there is c.Lm ecislatise intent to lie contrar>. Id. at 6 (quotine i:\ Norma:: 1. Singer & Jo. Siiamnbie Sinuer. Sutherland Statutes_& Statutory Construction 21.14 (7th ed. 2tn10j (e:iiha’os iii oriuitvtl t) Lurtliemniome. a court woatd ilerpre: “or’’ as not disjunctive if >ueli an ititcrprctatiomi ‘‘led> to a llotet:tIailY dubious result.’ Desert lrriuation. ltd. v. State tO Nevada. 3 Nc’ lttto. 056 citine Wisconsin;. Duvchak. 395 N.W’.Zd 795, 8(11 ( \\ is. UXop. I hits. tl:e Ne; ada Supreme (‘o;mrt would read the ‘‘or” in section 12.5 ol SB487 tI nie.m that oni’ ‘tic entity, either the town hoard or the hoard ofcountv cOl1:tiissioners. is :iutt::i,ea ti itilpose a business Ike misc tee in a:: ttn:ncorporated town. unless such a ‘c,idi:e is cntm’ar\ to clear legislative intent or would lead to a potentially dubious result. l<cading seetnt I 2.5 of si3487 disjunctively to mean that oaR one etitit’ is attliori,’ed to mipose a bumsitmess license fee is not contrary to clear legislative iti:ent and \\Ott!d not lead to a pteitall dubious result. Rather. such reading of the section m neeescIr\ to a; ‘id at; absurd or utire:msonahle t’esult. \‘ & S Raiiwa>’ v. White line county. 125 Nev. 233. 230 ta stttute should he read in manner that - produces an . . . ,,, ahctttJ or utnre:vtnah!e resitlt”). I fthe ii: section 18.5 of Sf3487 were not read to he e. both tont board and a I’o:rt1 )f cottlits eoninnssaners could enact an ordtliatice retlait tie a mat ttrmai,l establishment or a medical marijuana establishment to oatiin a bnsitiecs license :ttd pa> n bttsiness license lee or :ax. wheh creates the possibility otha; inc coniliettag reLlu;retnet;ls oti au establishment. I erhertnore. subsectioti 3 ofscctioum 12.5 of Sf3487 lttnits the amoutit ofa business license fee or tax itiiposed ott a titarijitalla ctahlisIitiietit or medtcal tiarijutana estahlislitnent to 3 pereeui of the gross re\ctllte ol tie esahli>htnent. NRS 2(0. 183. If section 12.5 of Sfl$X7 \\it5 ititeriircted as autlitrizing both a towti hoard and a hoard of county commissioners to impose a business license Ce or tax. the first entity to enact the ordinance could nullify the poster of the second entity by itnposiig a business license fee or for the full amount authorized. lo :\ oid such absurd or unreasonable results, the “or” in section 18.5 must he read to he disjunctive and to authorize only one entity, either the town hoard or the hoard of couttts cotntiiissiot:ers to impose a business license ICe or tax on tnarijtmamla establisl:uiieiit’ or medical tiiartjuana establishments. Senator ‘etc ( iOiCOcCIiCa September Dl. 2018 l3ccatmsc section I 8,5 of 51t487 authorizes (,iiI\ one coats. either the town hoard UI Lie board ofcouits coninlissioners. to impose a business license lee or tax on Inariju:mmi:m csttmblisiinienis or medical marituana cNiabllshnients located iii an IminLtpuaicd town. we intmt not dcteniine which ot those entities i attthori,’eu to impose a business license e or ta\ in a particular unmcorporated towss, ‘the entits with time autliorits to enact ordinances br a particular tiriiiieorporated town is whatever entity is tile RO\ crsiing body ol tIle unincorporated town. I has, to determine which entits is atmtlioriicd to isllpise a business license fee or tax on nitirtjuana establishments or medical marijuana establislinietits in an unmeorporated town. ve must examine the pros isionS ol chapter 2t9 of NRS that demertiiinc which entity s the governing bods oLin unincorporated to\vn. iRllltcr 26) of \RS cstahlmslies two possiale enertfltlg bodies li11 an ustsmetmtporated town. SubseLticil: 5 oi’NRS 260.010 pro\iOes that ‘‘[cjxcept as o;her ise provideI iii Nl<S 260.511 (i to 260.022. inclttsi e. [lie hoa:ds Of counts coninussioners const;timte tIle go\crtiing bo.ls oliN tm:iitLorpo!atecm towns witnin their rcspecttve counties. 1 lie plain langoace ol tnis provision establishes that the pros o;ts oINRS Dm)ttl 6 to 269.022. IlcIlism\ e. tire ai exception 10 the general nle that the hoard of county eomtllisioners ola county the go\eriitmmg body oLin unincorporated tonti. l3ecauNe the provisions of \RS 269.016 to 260.1)22. inclusive, set rtll [Itt’ procedures thr the estzml’lislinient of a town board harm of mioveimnetit or an unincorporated town. subsection 3 ofNRS 269.11 ii must he cad to establish that the go\enlmmle body ofan ullmeorporatcd town is the board ofcottntv cotntnissioners unless the town hoard form of go\crmlmlient is established for the unincorporated town. Thus. the governing body ofati unincorporated town is: (I I the board if county coninimsstoners of the county in which the unincorporated tow n is located ii the toni hoard of governilient has not been established fir the unincorporated town: or (2) the town hoard of the utiitleot’pora!ed tonI if tile town floarU torn: of go eriiiiient las been estahhslted di that tinincorporated town ‘Ibis comieltiNioti concerning the authorily of hoards ofconntv cotalnissioners and to\Vti iloalds to ilflji(ISC a license ‘e or tax on marijuana estabhishnesits and nieu:e:l tti:mrijtt:ina establishments iii tinincorporated towns is supported bs a well—established rules of statutory coilsttuctioti. One such rule of statutory construetiotm reqttires’statutes to be read in [lie context of tile act and the subject matter as a whole. Barney v\bouni Rose I leatine & Air Conditiotlisiu. 124 Ne. 821. 826 (2008). Section 18.5 of 513487 is a new section coW lied tI chapter 26’) of NRS. Becattse section 1 8.5 of S 3487 is codi lied in chapter 269 of NRS. the provisions of that chapter are relevant to determining the meaning of section 18.5 of 5B4$7. Id.: l3aneuas State Industrial his, Svs., 117 Nec. 222. 228 [21)1)1 ) t’The intent of the l,euislattmi’e sums he discerned hs reviewing the staltite or tIle elmptcr as a k\hlo e. I As stated uhoi e. one rele ant provision olchapter 269 ol NRS is sui’scction 3 of NW’, 260.01 tm. which establishes that the hoard ofcotmis cOntmiN<oticrs of tne counts ill which an uitnco:porated town is located is the goven:ilig Senator Pete Goicoechea September 2 I. 21)1 8 body oi inc unincorporated town unless the tossn hoard orm ot uovernment is established br the uilucorporateu ton. In addition. NRS 269.022 provides that if the to\\n hoard tbrni o coverninelit is discont it I co br an unincorporated town, the government ci the unincorporated town and all of the assets and liabil:ties of the unincorporated tos n “re\ert’ to the hoard of county commissioners of the cou:Ov in which the unincorporated town is located. Because this section requires the government of the uninct’i orated town to “revert” to the hoard ofcountv commjssioners upon discontnuiance oftlie town hoard thrm otgoverninent. tlw power to govern the town in ust rest with the town hoard if the tow n hoard forrui of government is estabi shed ibr the unincorporated town. Thus, reading section I 8.5 of Sf3487 in the context otothier provisions chapter 269 of NRS governing unincorporated towns, that sechon must he read to mean that the hoard of county commissioners Na county is the entity authorized to impose a license lee or tax on marijuana estahl ishincnts and medical ntarij tuna establishments in the unincorporated towns of which the board is the governing body: hut the town board is the entity authorized to impose such a license fee or tax in the unincorporated tow n s for which tIlL’ tow n board forni of government is established. Based on the plain language ol sections 15 and 18.5 olSI3487 and well— established roles of statutors constrtiction_ it is the opinion ci this ottiec that section IS ci S I3i 87 does not authorize the board of counts commissoners of a cotintv to i ii vise a husi ness license tee or tax Oil marij tuna cstahl i shncnts or medical inarij Itaivi estahl i shments located iii an tin incorporated town in the counts Rathc r. pursuant to . section 18.5 obS13487: (I) a hoard of county commissioners is auttiori ccl to impose a business hcensc fec or tax on marijuana establishments and medical niarijtiana establi siniletits l teat ed in an unincorporated town of wh cli the board is the governing body: and (2i if a town hoard lbrm of government is established liar an tinincctrporated town, the town hoard is authorized to iiil)oSc a hti:;ines license i-c or tax on marijuana estttbl ishinients and medical marij anna estahl i slinietits located in the tini ncorporated town and the hoard of coun tv commissioners of the county in which the tint nco rporatcd town is located does not ha c the authority to impose such a business license fee or tax. II. Money Collected or Received from a Business License Fee or Tax on Marijuana Establishments and Medical Marijtiana Establishnienis Located iii an Lnincorpot’atcd Town Must Be Kept Separate and Used for the Sole Benefit of the uniicoi’poi’atcd Town. We ;ill now examine the statutory recltiirenlents governinu the tise of the noncy collected or received loin a business license fee or tax imposed by a hoard of cotnitv commissioners or a town hoard on marijuana estahhishtnents and medical marijuana establishments loea:ed in an untncompomteC town. [0 answer this question. \Vc \\ ill consider the piovis;ons of chapter 269 of NRS governing the use of money collected or received pursuant to that chapter in an tin incorporated town. Chapter 269 of NRS contains a spcctlic provision tha! governs the use oftnouev collected liar an unincorporated town mnnsuant to that chapter. Ptirsuant to subsection I Senator Pete ( duct teeltea September 21. Di) IS Paue I ofNRS 26t)M95. ill tee or tases. lines. oileitiires or oilier nionevs collected LI recei elI pursuant to chapter 260 of NRS are required to be paid to the county treasurer of the ecL!nt\ iii which the illone\s arc collected or reccixed. Subsection 2 nt NRS 269.0)5 then requires the uonnt treasurer to set the molie\Thpart as a lund to he used solek for the benefit ut the tow 1 or ens in winch they were collected or received [and) ejnter the s;Itne tIii the counts treasiners books to the credit ot the town or cit’ As staled above, a bLisiliess license lee or tax on marijli;inla establishments and medical marijuana estiblishinents located in an unincorporated town is authorized hs section 1 5.5 of S134X7. lie h created a new section in chapter 260 of NRS. Because the provision iritlmrtzttiu snub bnsitiess license Ic ot tax is included in chapter 26’) of NRS. aim nmnei recei\ed or collected troni the business license lee or tax is Haney received or collected pLIrc1mt 1 eli<nptcr 26’) of sl<S tad. thus, mist he kep: apart liar the sole ne:letd of the town in wInch (lie miles was collected or received. Because tiloiles coileeted or recekecl Iloni a basiness ieenmc lee or tax on inaliluana cst:thlisiinients and tueuieal timrjuan,t establishments located in an tininicornorate1l tO\oi is re\etllie collected or received pursuant Ii chapter 260 OI NRS. nt is tle opinion of tilIN olfice that ails revenue collected or received tro:n a 7t:sillesS license tee or tax iinptcd on stich estahhislinneats mist no; be Ucpos!tcu in tile cotintv ueneial lund liar the sole benefit the eotltltv, Rather, it is the oitliLin of this ot’fice that the revenue receit ci or collected front a business license lee or tax imposed ott niariitt:ma establislinients and medical ii;irtjtniiia csLnI’lislnlletIts located in an unincorporated town in ans counts ut this State must IlL’ deposited ni a separate lund maintained liar the benefit of the maite orporated town and used solels liar the benefit o tIle unincorporated town. (tN(:t.I StUN lt.ised on the pl;nit aneu;ige ol sections 5 arid IX.5 of 5l3—ZX7 and well— cstal’lisllcll roles ol’ statutors construetioti. it is the cipittion o!ths office th:tt section 1 5.5 of SB457 coverns the inipositioli ot’htistnecs license lees and taxes on mariiiniia es;lhlislitlictitsanLl medical miriinani esLiN:tshnients located in unincorporated to\\t15. II’ a mariinana estibasllmetit or tnehicat tnarin;iiia e’ i l-anient is located in an untneorporated town Hr w mcii a icsird ot ct’titltv .r;ialissioiìers the got eininu btds, it is the opinion ot this ol flee that the hoard of uonnt eonimissiotiers 1 the eoants in \\ lHcht the utiiitcurpoiatecl tow ii is located is atitliorized to ittipose a business license lice or tax Liii such ;ni ernablislitnetit. I Icittet en’. if the tow it board ortn ot goteriltilent has been established or an riniiicorporatecl town lMiuatU to XRS 269.16 to 260it22. inelusite. it is the opinion ofttiis ottice that the town hoard ot ilte unincorporated town is the etitits authorized to impose a business license lice or tstx ott a marijuana establishment or medical tnariluana establislititent located in the unincorporated town. Finally, because ans mottev collected or reccit ed rota a business license fee or tax miposed on inariuatia estabhisltinents or medical mariluana establishments located ri an unincorporated town is monies collected or received pursuant to chapter 269 ofNRS. it is the opinion of tIns ollice that NRS 261,1.1105 prohibits the deposit ot the money in the counts general trmd Senator F’ere ( ‘icocellea September 2 2(t X - Paee I 1 and. instead, requires an\ such ione to be kept separate rum other nione> ol’ the cointtv and used mr The sole renei)t ol the unincorpc’r.ied t°n in hteh the mine\ is COILQTeLL ‘ lIuu ia\e an’ Turtller questions regardinti ibis matter. pLaNe d’’ not hesitate to e,intael this couice Sineerel. lhLLhT .1. I .ea,clali\e Counsel B\ Iii’ ITt I LITTIL Senior Principal Deput legislative Counsel n I renda I ‘rdoes I egi slaik e Ctitiiiset 3_I l::clt11 I Ic N” I iT’ O,.,::’z’’’C’; II$-i k Robin HebrocklPahrump Valley Times Amargosa resident John Bosta is pictured addressing the Nye county Commission at its February 6 meeting, explaining that he does not believe the county is legally allowed to pocket marijuana license taxes and fees from businesses located in unincorporated towns. The money, he asserted, should be placed in funds dedicated to the given town, an opinion with which the Legislative Counsel Bureau recently agreed. L Thinkstock Marijuana money in the Silver State is in question after the Nevada Legislative Counsel Bureau issued an opinion stating that counties are not authorized to place certain monies related to pot businesses into the county’s general fund. Marijuana business license fees and taxes from establishments within unincorporated towns are required to be used solely for the benefit of said unincorporated, the bureau advised. By Robin Hebrock Pahrump Valley Times September 28, 2018- 7:00 am Over the past eight months, Amargosa resident John Bosta has been repeatedly blasting Nye County for ‘operating under the color of the law” and it appears that Bosta may just be right. The dispute centers on the county’s collection of maruana business )icense taxes and fees from establishments located within the boundaries of unincorporated towns. Bosta has staunchly asserted that the county does not have the authority to collect those 1 taxes and fees, but to no avail. The county had reiterated multiple times that it did not accept Bosta’s interpretation of Senate Bill 487 and continued to follow its marijuana regulations as usual. Now, Bosta has been vindicated with a letter of opinion from the Nevada Legislative Council Bureau that sides with his belief. The county is still in the process of analyzing the opinion and detailed information on the possible effects the opinion could have on the county’s budget and its processes going forward has yet to be announced. “The county is still reviewing this opinion to determine what changes need to be made, if any. We will inform everyoneonce the county and the Nye County District Attorney’s Office has had time to evaluate the opinion,” Nye County Public Information Officer Arnold Knightly stated when reached for comment. He also noted, “The opinion conflicts with prior conversations the county had with the Nevada Department of Taxation when establishing the county’s processes regarding this new industry.” The Legislative Council Bureau opinion came after Bosta, meeting with continued resistance from the county each time he attempted to convince the Nye County Commission of his viewpoint, turned to Nevada Senator Pete Goicoechea. As a state senator, Goicoechea was able to go to the Legislative Council Bureau for a legal opinion on the intent of Senate Bill 487. Specifically, Goicoechea asked the bureau first, whether a county had the authority to impose business license fees and taxes on marijuana establishments, and second, whether a county is permitted to require such revenues to be deposited into the county’s general fund and be used for the sole benefit of that county. In the 10-page document, the Legislative Council Bureau outlines the reasoning behind its opinion, focusing on the language contained in Senate Bill 487 and Nevada Revised Statute 269. “Based on the plain language of sections 15 and 18.5 of SB 487 and well-established rules of statutory construction, it is the opinion of this office that section 18.5 of SB 487 governs the imposition of business license fees and taxes on marijuana establishments and medical marijuana establishments located in unincorporated towns,” the opinion conclusion reads. “If a marijuana establishment or medical marijuana establishment is located in an unincorporated town for which a board of county commissioners is the governing body, it is the opinion of this office that the board of county commissioners of the county in which the unincorporated town is located is authorized to impose a business license fee or tax on such an establishment,” the opinion continues. “However, if the town board form of government has been established for an unincorporated town pursuant to NRS 269.16 to 269.022, inclusive, it is the opinion of this office that the town board of the unincorporated town is the entity authorized to impose a business license fee or tax on a marijuana establishment or medical marijuana establishment located in the unincorporated town,” the opinion states. This interpretation would mean that Nye County does not have the authority to impose license fees or taxes on marijuana establishments in locations such as Amargosa and 2 Tonopah, both of which maintain an elected town board. For Pahrump, however, the county commission is the acting governing body and therefore, it is allowed to impose fees and taxes on pot businesses located within the town of Pahrump. Despite this power, the commission does not have the lega) authority to pace those fees and taxes collected in Pahrump, or any other unincorporated town, into the county general fund! the opinion states. “Finally because any money collected or received from a business license fee or tax imposed on maruana establishments or medical marijuana establishments located in an unincorporated town is money collected or received pursuant to chapter 269 of NRS, it is the opinion of this office that NRS 269.095 prohibits the deposit of the money in the county general fund and, instead, requires any such money to be kept separate from other money of the county and used for the sole benefit of the unincorporated town in which the money is collected.” It is unknown at this time how much funding in Nye County and its various towns could be impacted by the opinion. Knightly also took the time to point out that the repercussions of the opinion could reverberate not just locally but throughout the Silver State as well. “It is also important to note that this opinion could have far-reaching impacts beyond Nye County,” Knightly stated. An inquiry for information on this situation was sent to the Nevada Department of Taxation, particularly focusing on whether they agreed with the opinion and how many counties and total dollars would be affected. Department of Taxation Public Information Officer Stephanie Klapstein assured that the department was looking into the matter and would provide the requested information in the near future. Follow up details on the Nevada Department of Taxation’s response to the opinion will be included in an upcoming edition of the Pahrump Valley Times. Contact reporter Robin Hobrock at thebrock@pvtirnescom 3

Commissioner Meeting

Please read into minutes Dear Nyc County Committee Members: As a property owner in Tonopah Nyc County Nevada, 1 am requesting a thorough investigation into Patented Mining Claims that have been STOLEN from my company JABLONSKI ENTERPRiSES LTD. The men and women that have worked in concert with each other to accomplish this THEFT ha crossed County, State and Thtemational boundaries. The FACT of the matter is that an audit of the Assessor and Recorder Logins and Notes will show how this was accomplished through methodical changing of Parcel Numbers without any Real Estate transactions or Laws to support their keystrokes. This was done over time and involved a cooperative effort. When I SUED I was hit with ANTI-SLAPP which is the most ridiculous ABUSE OF POWER that has ever been concocted. I am requesting a Grand Jury Investigation. My companies address was changed more than once. Judge Wanker has contradicted her own ruling and worked to help my adversary to accomplish their goals. I-Icr LAST Ruling makes no sense at all and if it is robe believed- I would have ZERO LAND in Tonopah, which is NOT the case. I have a Parcel that somehow has defied all Logic, Reason, Ethics and Rule of Law. Please NOTE all attached documents. When I had a conversation with Byron Foster he stated “1 don’t take Bribes like some of the people around here” when I inquired further about who is taking bribes, he refused to provide any names. Below isl-lis Letter: Byron Foster <bfoster@co.nye.nv.us> May 14 to me Denise: I did get back to you the same day I talked to you.. Per our conversation, I stated that the reason why Desert Queen was lefi in Jablonski Enterprises Ltd. was due to document 8O7025, court order, which did not revoke the sale of that portion of the Desert Queen mining claim. The other mining claims that were referenced in this court order in the name ofJablonski Enterprises were revoked based on the DH807025. As far as what Judge Kimberly Wanker was referring to, I cannot comment on that as I was not in the court room for this proceeding. Byron Foster Mapping Administrator Nyc County Assessor’s Office 160 N Floyd Dr Pahrump, NV 89060 Phone: (775) 751-4209 Fax: (775) 751-4207 Nyc County is an equal opporluniw provider, employer, and lender **Jhis communication, including any attachments. may contain confidential information and is intended only for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. Any review, dissemination or copying of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of the original message. }“ ATTACHMENT 2 His Letter makes zero sense H! His predecessor, Deborah Orrick stated “I’m just trying to keep my job” when I questioned her how my land could be handed over to another company when I have a recorded Quit Claim Deed and Court Order. Afler paying Taxes for 4 years it makes ZERO sense that 768 acres can turn into unknown acreage and a NEW parcel number with a TAX CARD without any RECORDING or TRANSACTION to support change in ownership. The FIRST recording of the parcel number is a JUDGEMENT from a Federal Case where my Company is ordered to pa’ GREG EKINS of G.1.S Land services. Why do I have to pay Sanctions and Legal Fees to Criminals that are blatantly STEALING. This is OUTRAGEOUS and I OBJECT to this blatant FICTION. The Attorneys who are Officers of the Court have worked hand in hand with Elected Public Officials/Employees and a JUDGE to deny mx right to conduct business in Nevada utilizing the Patented Land that! purchased and have paid taxes on. Please note that Jablonski Enterprises,Ltd. objects to this illegal machination and requests that our companies right title and interest he restored. Sara ‘Beryl” Pess inherited the Mark Eden I/state was a FLORIDA Resident and passed away on May 28, 2010 on 8/26/2010 in the AS400 Notes Jovlene Zimmerman is referring to George Carter not being administrator to Mark Eden Estate- Now v. ith all the LIES Clayton Brust has told about Bid Rigging and not KNOWING Sara Pess was dead Why is this being referred to iii the Assessors Notes???? The Attorney Clayton I3rusl was knowingly accusing a deceased woman of bid riguing to complicate further The Mark Eden Estate. Clay ton Brust and ALL of SUMMA, LLC owners need to he carefully looked at as thieves, claim jumpers & scavengers. They purchased an”AS IS” Estate and haxt ZERO right to OUR LAND Their attempt is Futile and their documents are Not in Good Order’ That is a Fact. Ask them for the deeds, metes and bounds and title work. It’s a NOT! I ING The Clark County Probate Court (lid not retrieve the PROPERTY Documents because it is in Florida and Sara Pess had Creditors. Her Heirs rigged a work around in Nevada and abandoned the LAW!H lhe FBI in Las Vegas were informed and did not call or question me regarding this case. They consider it a Civil Case. FBI Miami easily saw the criminal and was told to give me back my evidence folder by the Las Vegas Office. This is a I-IUGI3 Theft and I object! Jahlonski Enterprises, LTD has been accused of all kinds of outrageous actions and they are all false. The answer is simple Sara is a Florida Resident, she has creditors, her family knew this and participated in this elaborate ruse in lieu of honestx. Ifthev would like to do the right thing admit the deception and Put everything in correct order I will be waiting. Denise Clark Managing Director Jahlonski Enterprises,Ltd.