August 14, 2024

Commissioner Lee

stated no, there will be an opportunity when the item is opened. Karen Waldman requesting her comments to be in the record: “I am requesting my comment be made of the public record. What are you going to do to reverse the Mediwaste CUP? There are scores of inaccuracies that the Applicant gave, which have been pointed out to both you and the BOCC. The Site Development Plan should be a different one that the existing Pinnacle Propane plant one because this operation is not at all like the propane distribution plant. It is a REFINERY!!! The attorney (who happens to also do work for the county) that represented MediWaste stated: This facility was recently operated as a propane facility, there will be no change to the building since the end product, DME that is a fuel additive, is very similar to propane. Just because a fuel may or may not be "similar to propane" Page 1 of 12 does not justify the difference in being a storage and distribution of a fuel versus an actual refinery of fuel. Again, from the Minutes: Mr. Oganesian: One on end you have renewable DME being piped down into tanks to sell and on the other end the carbon residual ash is what's brought to the landfill. Just what are the codes -or are there any-for having a refinery of fuels in Pahrump? The Applicant stated that 60% of the weight volume that's put in the machine will come out as renewable fuel. There has also been a miscommunication about the biochar (or anything else) going into our landfill. I'd like to read the portions of the minutes that involve the Applicant's admittance that they do indeed plan on taking their products to the landfill: From the Minutes: Commissioner Koenig stated the residual biochar will be transported offsite to a landfill that is not ours. Mr. Fiorentino stated it will be going to your landfill or it will be recycled and used for other purposes. Commissioner Koenig asked what is the cubic feet will be used in the landfill? Ryan Oganesian, President of MediWaste Disposal, stated they will provide 42 cubic enclosed containers that will be a couple tons each month. Commissioner Koenig asked how long it will take to fill up a 40 ft container? Mr. Oganesian stated once a day or every other day. Commissioner Lee asked if they spoke to the landfill operators? Mr. Oganesian stated yes, there will be a charge for the loads that go there. Commissioner Hayden asked if they would accept waste that has heavy metal in it? Mr. Oganesian stated the state of Nevada considers all medical waste trash, which goes to the landfill. Our materials from the California facility are being transported in fully enclosed DOT graded containers. Commissioner Hayden asked if the material is ash when it's brought to the landfill?

Mr. Oganesian

stated yes, over 60 % of the weight volume that's put in the machine will come out as renewable fuel. 20-25% of the material will come out as ash. All material is considered trash today, is permitted to go to the landfill.

Commissioner Hayden

stated her concern of the ash becoming airborne in the landfill. Mr. Oganesian clarified that it is heavier than ash, it's similar to compost. There I could continue but I think I've made my point. The Applicant clearly states it will go into our landfill. And since he also states that Nevada views all medical waste as trash without the need to process it into other by-products, do we really need a company to bring another state's toxic waste to Pahrump? We aren't going to stop until you fix this. We don't want a refinery OR to have our landfill be overloaded from multiple states' medical waste.” James Petell stated Mark Fiorentino represented Focus Group at Manse and 160. They wanted 4000 sq ft homes on 1 acre. He is concerned of the dog rescue at 2271 N Barney, Furever Nevada Foundation, someone has the permit for this, there has been no 90-day review as of June, he is also putting another rescue somewhere else. The dogs bark and smell. People want to know what they will do with the situation. He has 7 dogs on the property. Maryan Hollis stated she hopes the board watched the presentation given by Mr. Fiorentino at the BOCC. Everything he said contradicted what was said at the RPC. Is there a conflict of interest if he does County work as well? She asks for her comments be made into the record. “In addition to what the other speakers have said, I'd like to focus on the storage and the plans to have an extremely large amount of fuel sitting on the property. From the Minutes:

Commissioner Hayden

asked how much is going to be stored on the property before it is moved off? Mr. Oganesian stated they anticipate being 25-30% of volume capacity weight per month. The capacity is 1.4 million pounds for this system. As for storage there is plenty of space inside and a second building. They can also keep trailers in the yard and plan on processing daily. And that's just for the medical waste. Perhaps you should do some research on some of the trailers filled with putrid medical waste that was "stored" outside at another facility. The smell will be unbearable, especially in the heat of the summer. Fuel storage? No problem! From the Minutes: Ms. Gomez: Initially, the system will not store more than 10,000 lbs. of DME on site to limit the risk of fire and explosion. Additional measures will be implemented when the facility decides to move beyond 10,000 lbs. and then enters into the CAP program. 10,000 POUNDS OF DME FUEL, and they would have more but they want to "limit the risk of fire and explosion?" Clearly, they plan on having even more fuel stored, and even if that means they have to get additional permits, it doesn't look like this operation has any plans to limit the production of refining fuel.” Tammy Pitman stated anyone that has seen plastic rolling around the desert it is there forever, when you turn it into ask like Mediwaste it is degraded and the heavy metals etc will leach into the system. There is the issue that we aren’t supposed to have ash in our landfill at all. So, they shouldn’t be able to put ash in the landfill. Tynia Dickson stated about 10 – 12 years ago she and her husband tried to open a bumper boat business on Hwy 160 and the biggest concern that was brought to them was drain on services, such as the FD. That was a reason that was cited for her not to get a permit. She has concerns about the medical waste facility and their drain on the emergency system and the long-term effects of them polluting our town. She wants them to reconsider. Page 2 of 12 Ammie Nelson stated she wants to talk about the accident on Hwy 160 between Las Vegas and CA that burned for 3 days with lithium batteries and solar panels. You couldn’t drive past there because it was so toxic. The lithium mining up north will be driving through Nye County with these products, and it is something they need to think about. John O’Brien stated Monday they were in court on the injunction, and they weren’t successful. They were told there was administrative relief, which is the RPC and the BOCC. There are other options they are looking into and they are scheduling a meeting with the legislature and the Governor. They are going to try to change the law. No one in Pahrump wants Medical Waste brought in there from another state. They’ve collected 200 signatures by one person in one day. 4% of our annual usage of the landfill is being proposed by a company that doesn’t even live here. Bringing in from out of state at our expense. Suzie Hertz stated she doesn’t want the Mediwaste here, there are many other ways to bring employment and economic wealth to the community that don’t harm it, make it go away.

Commissioner Lee

stated she submitted some minor typographical errors to staff but those have no bearing on the context of the minutes.

Commissioner Lee

welcomed our new Commissioners and present Gina Meredith with her RPC plaque for years of service.

Commissioner Carbone

referred his section to Kristi Siegmund the Manager of Animal Services. Kristi Siegmund stated she is here tonight to discuss a major challenge that we face here in our community and that is the overpopulation and the sheer number of abandoned animals that we have here in our town. We're just truly overrun with these unwanted and abandoned animals. Spay and neuter, we talk about it a lot and there's a lot of medically amazing things and good that spay and neuter does for an animal. But one of the other things it does is help with overpopulation. We bring up the possibility of spaying neuter ordinances and something that has been discussed and the reason why I'm here tonight is the possibility of a standard or ordinance that is geofenced for our Pahrump Planning district. Something that will sit in Title 6, but really apply to Pahrump because the reality is we're not seeing the same crisis in other parts of our county, but we are seeing it here. She understands we have a lot of ranchers, we have a lot of farmers and those people have working animals and with that she also sees exemptions. We have exemptions for animals that work with our law enforcement. We have exemptions for animals that are service animals. Why not discuss exemptions for ranch hands, animals, farming animals as well? She’d like to get the community feedback and that's why she’s here tonight at the RPC. To just hear good, bad and different, what are some suggestions? She would like is some ownership and accountability of these pet owners and responsibility of these pet owners. She hears from a lot of people in the community every single day, but that's just a small sample and our community is much larger than that.

Commissioner Carbone

stated as people move in and they are renting a lot of places doesn’t allow animals and they are starting to show up. But you can see a crisis happening.

Commissioner Lee

asked if Title 6 will come before them before it goes to the Board.

Commissioner Carbone

stated no, it will go before the BOCC sometime in October. They are hoping they will get things completed and processes in place. They are looking to get a Dr at the county facility to do the spay and neuter.

Mr. Waggoner

stated if they want we can put it on an agenda for discussion to give comments.

Commissioner Carbone

wouldn’t have a problem with that.

Commissioner Lee

stated they could get some good public comment for solutions and suggestions to bring to the Board. Michelle Nelson stated one of the suggestions is the geofencing, which would be specific to the PRPD.

Commissioner Bohannon

asked what is being done for pet owner responsibility, what are they doing as far as acknowledging the responsibility today?

Ms. Siegmund

stated our regulations, because pets are considered property everyone can do as they wish, but they have control. They see a lot of owners that let their dogs run at large. When it comes specifically to responsibility of a good pet owner, they currently don’t have regulations to enforce it.

Mr. Waggoner

stated the facility mentioned before is not a licensed sanctuary, it was supposed to come back and it didn’t, we will address the amount of animals. Title 6 allows them to have 5 and Code Compliance will address it. b. Director’s Report

Mr. Osborne

stated for July total Planning applications received was 235 which was 43 more than last month. Total applications processed was 107 which was 27 more than last month. Building Permits for the month of July single family residential was 49 which was 14 more than the previous month. Multi Family was 0 which was 1 less than last month. Commercial permits was 13, which was 5 more than last month and total permits all categories was 229 which was 35 more than last month. Total inspections in all categories was 13 which is 56 less than last month. Page 4 of 12 New Code Compliance complaints received was 55 which was 8 more than last month and closed 39 which was 6 more than last month. Previous items heard by the RPC: ZCMP-24-7 was heard by the RPC at the 5/21/24 meeting and recommended for denial, it was heard 7/16/24 by the BOCC and was denied. CU-24-11 was heard by RPC meeting and it was denied. The applicant filed an appeal and it was heard by the BOCC 7/16/2024 and BOCC upheld the RPC denial of the CUP. ZCMP-24-6 was heard by the RPC 7/12/2024 and recommended for denial. The BOCC heard the item 7/16/24 and it was denied. The associated MP amendment was also heard by the BOCC on 7/16/24 and it was also denied.

Mr. Waggoner

asked for clarification that the streets that are denied are continuation of the same street?

Mrs. Medici

stated yes, when they are in the review process and the comments from the review agency noticed that they are duplicates and that is where the comments come from. It will not affect those three names, the streets are already approved.

Commissioner Lee

asked if the duplicate street or continued streets, can they be driven from one end to the other without interruption.

Commissioner Tyler

asked if the street names are already approved, why would we approve it again.

Mrs. Medici

stated they technically wouldn’t because it is already approved.

Mr. Waggoner

stated he recommends removing those three off the list with the motion.

Mrs. Medici

reviewed her staff report stating MF residences are permissive with a CUP. They have seen this application before, the original CUP had expired the project will be served by Great Basin Water. Staff is recommending approval of the application.

Commissioner Lee

stated it looks like the site plan doesn’t meet parking standards. Will they see a waiver or will that be addressed during site development.

Mrs. Medici

stated that will be addressed during Site Development and if a waiver is required it will be brought forward.

Commissioner Bohannon

asked what provisions will be done to make sure children are safe since this is in between two GC properties. Khosrow Alighchi applicant stated the property will be a gated with adequate walls and fencing around and open space on the back. The kids can’t just go outside it is gated and will be built compatible with commercial on both sides.

Commissioner Carbone

asked if he said wall or fence.

Mr. Alighchi

sated it will be a combination of wall and fence.

Commissioner Carbone

asked how high.

Mr. Alighchi

stated 6 ft, whatever the standard fence is.

Commissioner Lee

asked the applicant if he has read, understood and agree to the conditions of approval.

Commissioner Koenig

stated on page 2 item #6 – why is there impact fee for roads if we now have impact fee for them?

Mr. Waggoner

stated it says funds for fire, sheriff, streets and schools.

Commissioner Lee

stated for clarification this isn’t for a zone change, multi family is a permissive use in the General Commercial Zoning. Tammy Pitman stated she understands the need for entry level housing and this would probably qualify. The ingress and egress is unacceptable on the map. They need a right and left turn lane. Karen Waldman state her biggest concern is at the back of the buildings is a 5 ft landscaping corridor. The building ends, 5 ft there is the next set of buildings on one side or parking lot on the other. 5 ft isn’t very big, she doesn’t know if that is a good access for emergencies, and she doesn’t know what code is but there is a lot of landscaping that will try and hide those buildings. That is a big concern for her. Page 6 of 12 Jim Petell stated he is looking at the maps it looks like a 15-minute city within an acre. It should be denied now, the Masterplan is a living document you can change thigs but within reason. He was involved with the Masterplan as a citizen, right now we are headed into an economic crisis. They need to do their due diligence again. Suzie Hertz stated put the residential units in a residential area, from a logical standpoint you have no idea who the tenants are or could be that could negatively affect the residential community if it were to be there. This isn’t the place for people to live across the street from a gun range or down the street from a Medical Waste Facility. People should be living where there is space or facilities for them to live a quality of life. Ammie Nelson stated she isn’t sure if they will be low income or affordable housing but she is trying to imagine the type of people that will be in need of this project. If it is low income or section 8, it will be subsidized by the State and if it goes downhill and the owners walk away how do we know what will happen to it in the future. It will be an eyesore if it isn’t kept up. There will be an impact on traffic, there needs to be more consideration especially on the location. She hopes the board doesn’t pass this.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated his concern is traffic, why are we mixing it with GC, but the code allows Multi- Family Housing. This is a continuing use permit and not a zone change. He has concerns about safety, but he thinks we can get more from the Planner as far as safety, intended use and making sure we can get proper parking, he thinks she has more information she can provide for us.

Mr. Waggoner

stated that is exactly what Site Development Plan review is, that is the stuff that is looked at. Parking calculations, traffic counts, street improvements that can be triggered by those traffic counts. That is all addressed through that process and either approved or not. It has to meet those criteria, it isn’t reviewed as part of the CUP, but it is reviewed prior to them getting a permit to develop.

Commissioner Bohannon

asked for clarification if this has been through that process.

Mr. Waggoner

stated no, this is an entitlement to begin that process.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated there is still more to be done here.

Commissioner Lee

stated yes, this gives them the ability to start the next steps to get the engineered plans, designs, site development done and start the review process.

Commissioner Tyler

stated or if they have to give up units to obtain more parking. What we see in front of us isn’t necessarily what will be built, this hasn’t been through review yet, this is what he hopes to have. She has a comment on MF in general, everyone says we need it, but have people that come up and say they don’t need it where it is, or in their neighborhood, or they don’t need it because there is too much commercial or too far from commercial. Apparently, we aren’t supposed to put it anywhere.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated one of the things he has seen very successful is having a mix of GC and MF. We are lacking that here and he has spoken with people that have said we have a dire need for it. We aren’t talking about HUD but entry level housing. His concern is making sure of the safety for the children, adequate parking and he looked into if there were comments from surround properties and there wasn’t.

Commissioner Carbone

stated he knows they have asked this questions before whether or not it is section 8 or not, but who will manage the facility for any period of time? A lot of people don’t know that they don’t get to see the outcome of the site development process. How do we get that out to everyone?

Mr. Waggoner

stated it is the part of development everyone hates. He would also like to say we aren’t allowed to dictate who an owner rents to. We can’t talk about race, income or anything like that. Page 7 of 12

Mr. Alighchi

stated all the communities he has seen MF and Commercial are side by side. MF want to be close to the amenities and work, that is why you see in Las Vegas and every major city you see them side by side. It will be an asset to Pahrump.

Mrs. Medici

stated for clarification that there are only 34 parcels, not 38. They originally had 38 but removed 4 parcels that front Homestead to stay GC. The Planning Department is proposing all parcels be rezoned to RE-1 in accordance with the parcel size of 1 acre. They aren’t located in a tariff area, where GC development can be served with water and sewer connections. The Planning Dept. has been contacted by property owners within the section to develop as residential and they weren’t’ able to do the current zoning. Staff recommends approval of the application to the BOCC.

Mr. Waggoner

stated why these parcels were ever zoned GC makes no sense. Many people who have bought something that has said it was GC and bought it for $3000 and want to develop it can’t because there is no infrastructure out there.

Commissioner Carbone

asked if this was passed over to the Water District.

Mrs. Medici

stated she believes it was but will check.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated he was looking over the area and some of the wells are being drilled to 300 ft. What is going on with the depth do we have enough water for the wells and septic? He is concerned with that. What kind of feedback did we get from the property owners, did we send them negative feedback that if they don’t respond we will proceed anyway.

Mr. Waggoner

stated they received one letter of support in feedback, everyone was notified.

Commissioner Bohannon

asked if a negative response means they will proceed with this?

Mr. Waggoner

stated we don’t say respond or we will proceed, we ask for comments or provide a comment, we accept it, but we don’t just go out and threaten them if they don’t respond.

Commissioner Koenig

asked how many lots have water allocations if any?

Mr. Waggoner

stated he doesn’t know if they have water allocated to them or not.

Commissioner Lee

stated yes, those are the existing brothels.

Mrs. Medici

stated yes, when the parcels were zoned in 2007 with the Comprehensive Rezoning Project, they want to see the area developed and high hopes to develop those commercially. In the last several years we have had property owners come in and try to build a home but couldn’t because of the zoning. One of the goals in the Masterplan is to ensure the zoning and masterplan go hand and hand and the GC doesn’t go with RDR they wanted to bring it back to what it was designed for as a subdivision of residential homes and to answer regarding the water rights, when the map was finaled and recorded back in the 70s water rights were relinquished at that point. There was also a concern that the lots are too small and they are an acre and they have several, even hundreds of parcels that are able to have a well and septic. She has spoken to three of the owners in the last week and they are happy they can build on the property now.

Mr. Waggoner

stated there are separation requirements for well and septic systems from adjacent properties and on their own properties as well and it all reviewed as part of the permitting process. There has been comments about the water district, today they are commercial properties, they could drill a well and put a septic, and as far as whether or not the WD says they support it or not, it is just a comment that doesn’t dictate what happens.

Commissioner Carbone

stated he isn’t in agreement with that, we are looking at how much water we use, receive and may have in the future. That is why he asks about it. When do we say we can’t build anymore because there is no water?

Commissioner Bohannon

asked if there is any distance requirements regarding the brothels that we need to be considering.

Commissioner Lee

stated no, they are existing brothels.

Mr. Waggoner

stated they are not inside the Town of Pahrump. That is why we removed the lots that front Homestead to build in a buffer from them. Page 9 of 12 Motion: recommend approval to the BOCC of ZCMP-24-14, Action: Recommend Approval to the BOCC, Moved by John Koenig, Seconded by Tim Bohannon. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 6). Yes: Beth Lee, Faith Simunick, John Koenig, Leah-Ann DeAnda, Pamela Tyler, Tim Bohannon.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated based on information he just received, he must recuse himself from item # 10. He recently submitted a resume to a recruiter and found out the position was with Prairie Fire.

Commissioner Bohannon

left the meeting.

Mr. Waggoner

stated after discussion with the DA, on the original approval the condition #6 was removed because he thought it didn’t apply. The original condition stated “the Development Agreement should be reviewed, amended or rewritten as applicable to reflect the proposed development and new vision prior to the recorded Development Agreement expiration date of July 27, 2024.” He didn’t see that it needed to be on there, but the condition was met by the applicant. He had meetings with them and discussions and the decision was to let it expire because there is so much that would need to be amended from what was original proposed. Prairie Fire is going in a different direction than what the previous owners was. He is asking for the condition to be added back in, because after discussion with the DA’s office we can’t modify the conditions with the exception of the extension of time that would apply to special condition numbers 9 and 10. Jeff Whittle representing Prairie Fire.

Commissioner Lee

stated she knows they are required on the first approval to go through NDEP and DWR, how is that process going.

Mr. Whittle

stated they are right in the middle of it and everything is going well. They are in compliance with the conditions they were originally given. The sewer treatment plant is almost ready to get that started and the water treatment plant is happening.

Commissioner Lee

asked if that is why they couldn’t make the 1-year deadline.

Commissioner Lee

asked if they have read, understood and agree to the conditions of approval including the addition by Mr. Waggoner.

Commissioner Carbone

stated his only issue is that there is a DA that doesn’t meet the requirements for what they are doing and that means we still have a DA for what they are doing. And he has a problem with that as a Commissioner.

Mr. Waggoner

stated there is no requirement for a DA. He has strongly suggested that the applicant does re-enter into a DA. But the entitlement to do what they are trying to do is the CUP, which is required for everything they have proposed, and that would be approved to move forward with, requires the CUP.

Commissioner Bohannon

returned to the meeting.

Commissioner Tyler

would like to see the draft of Title 6 draft at next meeting.

Commissioner Carbone

stated they can look at it and make comments, but he can guarantee their comments probably won’t be included unless it is something that really, really changes something.

Commissioner Bohannon

stated it would be nice to see the flow of decisions. For example, the Site Development, we have been through the CUP but what’s next. He would like the public and himself to have a clear understanding of the flow. He has spoken with Mr. Osborne about getting numbers that reflect year over year would be nice to have, how many permits vs last year for a trend. Another thing he would like to have as an early warning indicator for properties that are owned by someone that is dissolved or bankrupt. Being able to tell the Treasurer that a property has a bankruptcy on it as well as the finance area so they can make adjustments in the forecast.

Mr. Waggoner

stated he is way over stepping what this board does, we can’t make financial decisions for applicants. Through many of the applications, obviously when there are DA’s and developments being proposed that is all part of it but it isn’t within our purview to look up the financial status of an applicant when they apply for a zone change or a CUP. We have certain requirements we are required to make by code and those are the findings we are presenting to the board for your determination. The one thing we do look at are property tax verification. If taxes aren’t current, we don’t accept the application. Any deep dive into their financial state we don’t do. As far as permit numbers, you’ve been added to a distribution list. The numbers we provide gives you last month, last year and where we are in comparison to last year. It fluctuates we don’t have that drastic of a change. We saw a slowdown in COVID but that was reflected in the yearly totals. At the end of every fiscal year, we report how many permits they issued for the year. Anyone can be added to the spreadsheet by the building department.