Document Minden_doc_9e496b0454

N L V 1) A The Minden Town Board meeting was held at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, September 4, 2013, at 1602 Esmeralda Avenue, Minden, Nevada. Board members present: Matt Bernard, Charlie Condron, Roxanne Stangle, John Stephans and Steve Thaler. Staff present: Greg Hill, Jenifer Davidson, Rachel Hamer, Ryan Russell and Bruce Scott. The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Chairman Condron. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Ms. Stangle. Stangle/Bernard moved for the approval of the agenda as published. Motion carried unanimously. Bernard/Stangle moved for approval of the August 7th, 2013 minutes as published. Motion carried unanimously. Acknowledgement of Gifts: Ms. Davidson said that although there were none, the Town would like to thank Minden for the donation for Christmas decorations. Acknowledgement of Service Award: None Public Comment: None and Closed. STAFF REPORTS: 1. Public Works: report of activities by Greg Hill. Greg acknowledged that Well 7 has taken a long time and it is frustrating however, plans have been submitted to NDEP and DOCO. NDEP has approved the plans but we are waiting for Douglas County’s approval. Once we get comments back from Douglas County we can go forward with getting the permits. The Town will be looking for 3 bids for the relocation for sewer; it has been identified that the Town employees will be able to do some of the work and there is every expectation that it will go smoothly. The easement agreement with Maxton for the relocation is currently in the works. Heybourne Booster work has slowed down, but now waiting for power from NV Energy. No date when it will get done but it is on the list. Installing Chlorine tank and lines is on hold until the power is online. The samples taken are coming back good. NDEP has approved it to go online once the work is completed. Mr. Hill wanted the Board to be aware of some issues that have come up with the COD Garage construction. He was approached by the construction company who thought that the Town would be providing the lighting; he verified that the minutes from a previous Board meeting did not specify the Town paying, but indicated that the developer could approach the Town at a later date around budget time to discuss it again. The developer has put everything in but the street lights. There is an estimate of $16K to put in street lights plus the cost of wire and installation. Mr. Hill verified with the COD Superintendent of construction that the casino has no intention of paying for the lights. The Town received a response letter regarding the subdivision pond in Stonegate and they installed a recirculating pump to prevent wasting water. Mr. Thaler questioned if the Esmeralda street lights were part of the design criteria. Mr. Hill stated that they are on the plans, but that it doesn’t specify who is to provide only that they say, “Per Town of Minden detail.” The Board had not committed to this; the developer was previously told to come back to request at another time and didn’t. Mr. Bernard brought up the future of Francisco’s and what direction we are taking it. Mr. Hill stated that we are working with our Attorney on that issue and that there are some questions regarding abandonment that he is looking at, but that is the direction they are working toward. ---PAGE BREAK--- Minden Town Board Minutes September 4, 2013 Page 2 of 9 Mr. Bernard also inquired as to when the Well 7 easement was squared away, when we estimated that it will come online. The projected time is after the first of the year as they were not originally expecting the realignment of the sewer. Mr. Bernard was concerned about the timing for the Well coming online as well as the booster station, particularly with Carson City coming online in April. Mr. Scott said that the booster pump station is still in its contracted time frame; construction went quickly and they are now waiting for NV Energy. The Well 7 pump is already in the hole and it should be ready and tested well ahead of spring. Mr. Condron asked if both could be online by the first of the year and if they are not, can we still go online with Carson City? Mr. Scott said that the booster station should be moving along quickly once they get power. Well 7 will hopefully have a contract next month, but that time frame would be tight. We can service Carson City if Well 7 and the Booster Station are not online in April, but we will need them for high demand summer months. Mr. Condron added that perhaps we will have a very wet winter. 2. Engineering Report: report of activities by Bruce Scott. The street work is almost finished and they are tying up loose ends. Street sealing is scheduled for next week. The Buckeye Test Well should have a rig out there next week for the test well; it shouldn’t take long to drill and we will want to come right behind it with a drilling contract for a production well. He provided information for Mr. Thaler regarding the undergrounding of utilities from Mackland to MGSD; it is about the same distance as from the Y to 6th street costing about another four and a half million. Mr. Bernard asked what the plan was for putting the test well on line, and when it will be available. Mr. Scott said are hoping to come back with a drilling contract recommendation for the November meeting, and to start drilling in November. For target purposes we project going online in March. It is possible that water could be to Carson before April. Mr. Bernard expressed concern about it coming on line in time. Mr. Condron asked about the monitoring program. Mr. Scott that he was not prepared to give those numbers; we need to look at the summer pumping on the domestic wells as well as ours and then look at the recovery over winter. Mr. Hill said that we have done two quarters of monitoring this year, and the levels have been the same, except the irrigation well at the Mack Ranch. That well was most likely in recovery from being run hard for a long period of time. Mr. Condron requested a presentation with maps of the monitored wells for the Board to see how our production might be affecting those wells. Mr. Hill and Mr. Scott said that they could come up with something that could be available to look at each quarter that will help show trends. Ms Davidson mentioned that because these are private wells we may want to be sensitive to the owner’s privacy. We need to make sure that they are comfortable with the information that we make public. Mr. Scott said each one called to indicate a concern; we are all in this together but we don’t want to violate their trust. 3. Attorney Report: report of activities by Ryan Russell. In July we sent a letter to NDOT to request a formal agreement for the Gateway center and received a response that we were invited to a meeting to discuss it. We will respond and set up a meeting as soon as possible to be attended by Ms. Davidson, Mr. Thaler, and Mr. Scott. In regards to the “Comprehensive Regional Water System Plan,” he and the Town Manager attended the Carson Water Subconservancy Board of Directors meeting to inform them that the Minden Board did not commission or authorize the report, nor provide any materials for it. As a talking point for any future proposals, Minden would consider any proposals made to it in due course. The minutes from the meeting accurately reflect the comments that he had made. He has reviewed policy and ordinances with regard to the responsibility of the sidewalks, he provided the Town Manager with a memo which gives options, which will be brought to the Board at a later date. . 4. Manager’s Report: report of Activities by Jenifer Davidson. ---PAGE BREAK--- Minden Town Board Minutes September 4, 2013 Page 3 of 9 Ms. Davidson extended an invitation from the 2013 Douglas County Leadership Class to a networking event on September 12th at the CVIC Hall for service clubs and non-profits to attend. It is for organizations looking to utilize social media to get their word out. Critical Issues Conference held by the Business Council is coming up at the end of September. Traditionally one member from the Board attends. Mr. Thaler said he would like to attend and any other Board members interested need to let us know. Ms. Davidson recognized Rachel on her accomplishment of getting the delinquent commercial billing accounts to a more manageable level. During the water rate study we were carrying over $12,000 of revenue across the fiscal year in outstanding balances; this has improved considerably. 5. Board member committee reports:  Policy and Procedure Review- Steve Thaler said that he hopes to have the Street Closure Policy on the Agenda for next month, and is looking for some board input on some of the specifics to finish filling in the blanks. He also asked for additional input for other policies that the board may want to work on.  Event Planning- Roxanne Stangle said she has been working on the Christmas Event and wants to get everyone on the Board involved, committed, and find out what they are interested in doing. We will have the Art Association kid crafts in the Hall as well as more events from the Town, and it should be a great event.  Citizen’s Advisory Committee- Roxanne Stangle said that she is excited about our wonderful group of people volunteering their time. She acknowledged that several members of the Committee were currently present including Debra Lang, Debbie Jacobsen, and Sandy Deyo. Other members of the committee include John Hamer, Sheila Kendrick, Bev Giannopulos, and Jeff Stephensen. Committee contact information is available in the office. They kicked off the committee discussing the survey and the potential plans for the Gateway Center.  Capital Improvement Plan- Matt Bernard said he is anxious for progress on Gateway and that he will be attending the next Citizen’s Advisory Committee on September 17th to present the staff recommendations.  New Development Applications- John Stephans said that he and the Town Manager met with Bently Representatives to discuss the ideas that Mr. Bently would like to share with the Town. They are tentatively scheduled to move into the Farmer’s building in April with around 30 employees. They are looking into improvements with the old mill and creamery; and have met with Maker’s Mark to look into making the silos into a distillery using Minden water. They looked at the Fire Station building and discussed the possibilities of a walkway to the other side of Hwy 395 and the idea of the V&T Railroad returning. He discussed the possibility of Mr. Bently giving a presentation to the Town of what his visions involve for the future, and the Board expressed that they were excited to hear his ideas.  Minden Water- Charlie Condron said that he and Mr. Bernard attended a meeting with Mr. King, the state engineer, last month and discussed the progress that the Town has made toward putting our water to beneficial use. Mr. King is aware of our usage and is keeping a watchful eye that we are being good stewards and putting what we have to good use. Hats off to Mr. Bernard for talking about growth and moving cautiously, especially since we are just starting; we need to see that this business works and that we going to be ready. Mr. King is now drinking Minden water in Indian Hills and he notices the difference. Another idea is that within the next few months a water workshop might be appropriate for input on issues and policies in which we need to look into that we do not have right now, and identify issues that we can work on over time. There is a need to look at the big picture. Does our structure as a small Town work as a water company and where we go in the future? Mr. Condron asked that the Board speak with him or Ms. Davidson for their thoughts on a Water Workshop. ---PAGE BREAK--- Minden Town Board Minutes September 4, 2013 Page 4 of 9 6. Chairman Report –Mr. Condron has spent 2 years on the Board for CVAC, but the demands of his current employment and the responsibilities to the Town have limited the amount of time he is able to spend with them. He extended an invitation to other fellow Board Members who may be interested in being an active Board member or Liaison. If there is interest please free to call him. CONSENT AGENDA FOR POSSIBLE ACTION 1. Approval of July 2013 financial report including claims paid July 26, 2013 through August 22, 2013. 2. Approval of a request by Minden Fest for the Town of Minden to sponsor two additional days of the Esmeralda Avenue Farmer’s Markets, September 17th and September 24, 2013. Town approval would include closure of Esmeralda between Fourth Street and Fifth Streets 3. Approval of a request to waive street closure fees for the 7th annual Falcons Festival in the Fall, a fundraiser for Sierra Lutheran High School Athletics. Town approval would include closure of Esmeralda Avenue between Fifth Street and Fourth Streets, Thursday September 26th from 3:00 p.m. until 9:00 p.m. Ms. Stangle abstained from item number 2. Bernard/Stephans moved to approve all consent items. Item number 1 passed unanimously, item number 2 passed with 4 aye and Ms. Stangle abstaining, item number 3 passed unanimously. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA: 1. Discussion only regarding a presentation on an innovative heating and cooling concept utilizing Town of Minden Water at the Farmer’s Bank building located at 1597 Esmeralda Avenue owned by Bently Enterprises. Presentation and appearance by Stephen Witek, President of Sustainable Environment Engineered Design Inc., and the mechanical engineer for the remodel project. Ms. Davidson made note that and this is not an action item. A presentation was then given by Mr. Witek describing this new method of heating and cooling; the design specifications, the needs from the Town resources, and why they are looking to use this concept. Mr. Thaler said that there is something similar at the old county court house, but wondered about the difference in temperature that the water would be pumped back into the system, and in what volume. Mr. Witek stated that there it would change of about 10 degrees of 10% of the water, thus causing only around 1degree change to the total water temperature. The initial calculations of water volume are somewhere between 30 and 100 gallons per minute. The more water is pulled, the lower the temperature change is. Mr. Thaler then asked what was in it for the Town and why should we do this? Mr. Witek stated that this is a new and interesting way to utilize resources. Mr. Bernard thanked Mr. Witek for bringing this to the Board, but has concerns regarding the protection of our water quality, policies regarding non-consumptive use, and pressure. He also mentioned that he was looking forward to the future in partnering with Mr. Bently in any way that we can. Mr. Stephans questioned what other places were utilizing this kind of application and whether we were the guinea pig. There was discussion on another place in Ely using it, but no other locations could be identified. Ms. Stangle reiterated that her primary concern was the water quality. Bruce Scott expressed concern over the flow of the water within the pipes and asked Mr. Witek specific design questions particularly regarding water pressure. Mr. Hill stated that the system in Ely is actually in a school building. Primary concern is raising the temperature of the water. A one degree difference is ---PAGE BREAK--- Minden Town Board Minutes September 4, 2013 Page 5 of 9 insignificant but 10 degrees is significant particularly if we don’t know how much water is flowing through; he questioned how many of these systems we can provide service for before it does affect the temperature of all the water. He questioned the cost to the Town for pumping this water in and out even though it is not being consumed. The Board then discussed the time frame that Bently was looking at for completing this project and when they needed approvals to be able to move forward. John Copoulos their architect, stated that if they could bring this back for a decision in October they would be able to meet their time constraints. The Board requested answers to questions including how long has this been around, who else is using this technology, and why aren’t other people using it. The Board asked the staff to collect as much information as possible to have a recommendation ready for the Board. Public Comment: Bob Pohlman said there is a building in Ely that has been using this technology for years. Sandy Deyo said that this is intriguing but that this is new and we need to be cautious Robert McMillan had some concerns over pressure and backflow issues. 2. For possible action: Discussion and possible action to approve, approve with conditions, continue or deny a request to allow the developer of the Ranch at Gardnerville to construct a driveway on the Town of Minden’s well site (A.P.N 1320-33-210-032) to serve as a turnaround for Snaffle Bit Drive. Appearance by Rob Anderson, Principal Engineer, RO Anderson. This item was pulled at the request of the applicant. 3. For possible action: Discussion and possible action to review the proposed site design for the trailhead at Jake’s Wetlands and provide direction to Town Staff regarding a possible request for a variance to Douglas County Code. Appearance by Bruce Scott, Town Engineer. Bruce Scott spoke about the Jake’s trailhead grant that the Town received. The $66,000 is specifically for the hardscape, grading and parking, but no amenities or landscaping. Since sending it to Douglas County there has been changes to the requirements which include a block wall and a tree for each parking space. Staff needs direction to go forward to request a variance from the County concerning this request, or take a look at revising the budget as block walls can be very expensive. Ms. Davidson gave some background budget information for capital improvements; originally $200,000 was set aside in the budget for matching funds and in April it was reduced to $138,000. The Grant committee did not want to build another Town Park, and we gave an option to look at the removal of the landscaping and only fund hardscape to get an approval. Staff asked if the Board is willing to up the amount of $ to replace the landscaping; and if the Town is going to move forward requesting a major variance we need direction to do so, starting with consulting the surrounding residents. Mr. Bernard questioned why we didn’t know that the wall was a requirement? Staff had designed a trailhead and not a parking lot. The County is looking at it as a parking lot and applying respective code. Mr. Bernard and Mr. Stephans both agreed that a budget was set and we need to stick to our budget; landscaping can be done at another time but they would like to see this move forward. Town Staff said the Budget has not change, we are just requesting changing the matching funds amount. Also if we do seek a variance, we need public approval. Since the Grant is limited on what they will pay for, we may not have that ability under the county code in scaling back. Mr. Bernard sees that Minden’s interest in the trailhead can only help the County’s application with the Martin Slough Trail. He hoped they consider the whole. ---PAGE BREAK--- Minden Town Board Minutes September 4, 2013 Page 6 of 9 Staff discussed the possibility of building in phases since the block wall is such a major expense. They explained that the County required it because it is adjacent to existing development. The block wall, as well as the tree requirement (1 tree for each parking space), are things that would be part of a variance request. Public Comment: Mimi Moss with Douglas County Community Development explained the code provisions regarding the parking lot; the primary purpose of the dense landscaping to prevent headlights from coming into residences. The residents need to specify if they want dense vegetation. If the Board is directing staff to ask for a variance on the block wall, they can then ask for changes to the landscaping as well. Mr. Stephans and Mr. Thaler agreed that the next steps would be to go to the residents. Mr. Thaler believed it is probably unlikely that residents are looking for a wall or a very dense forest, so a variance is most likely going to be the route we go. Debra Lang asked if it will only be the homeowners in the direct area who will be notified; if not, it would be helpful to have maps given to the homeowners association for them to see the ideas in advance, also speaking as a homeowner she did not want to see a 6 foot wall. Ms. Davidson said the recommendation from staff would be that all residents would be notified in Winhaven as well as La Costa. Bob Pohlman brought up concerns regarding the flood plain. Sandy Deyo asked if Mr. Scott could clarify if the east side is an easement and if there is an elevation change. Mr. Scott said that there is a 20 foot easement on the other side of the fence and that there is an elevation change of around 2-6 feet depending where you are. Ms. Moss said that there is a portion of the area in the flood plain, but that the plan was to use a minimal amount of fill to take care of that. The fact that it is lower and has a 25 foot easement can be used as a justification for the variance on the block wall. The Board’s direction to Staff is to have communication with residents and Homeowners Associations in Winhaven to get their input and direction on whether to apply for a variance. Ryan Russell encouraged Staff to ensure that all residents within homeowners associations are notified. Mr. Scott asked if the direction was to move forward with a request for a variance, if the staff is comfortable that the residents are agreeable. The Board’s consensus and direction was to bring the item back before the Board after speaking with the residents and before requesting a variance. 4. For possible action: Discussion and possible action to approve, approve with conditions, continue or deny a request to adopt a Town of Minden policy permitting parcels outside of the Town boundary to connect to the Town Water system subject to payment of existing Town water system connection fees, review and approval of the connection details by the Town Engineer and direct supervision by Town staff at the time the physical connection is made. If approved the established surcharge on water rates for properties outside of the Town of Minden boundaries would also apply. Appearance by Bruce Scott, Town Engineer. Bruce Scott explained that a situation has developed from the water system extension on Amber Way which takes us outside the Town boundaries. There has been a request to drill a well on a parcel adjacent to the water line. It is routine for a well driller to ask for a notice or intent to drill. County had written a letter stating that they did not have a water main close but indicated that Minden did. The Staff ---PAGE BREAK--- Minden Town Board Minutes September 4, 2013 Page 7 of 9 recommendation was for the Board to make a policy in regards to instances like this where they can connect to our system. Although we are not looking to be the policemen, we would inform the state engineer that we will serve these customers. If they connected there are water right credits given by the state engineer for not drilling domestic wells. They would need a physical connection to the line; would not be allowed to drill per the state engineer, but would have Minden water and not incur the costs of keeping up their water system. The recommendation is that we do just like the Bently Science Park, and Mrs. Seeman on Zerolene both of whom are outside the Town boundaries. Historically the connection fee has been at the normal rate however the rate is surcharged by 1/3 because there is no ad valorum revenue since they are not within the Town boundaries. We think it is a good policy if we are in a position to avoid an abundance of domestic wells in the basin. Mr. Stephans expressed concerns over setting a policy that we have locked and loaded automatically instead of taking it case by case basis; he did not see the need to set up another policy when we have something already in place. Discussion continued on the difference between water rights and domestic well credits. Mr. Bernard questioned how common it is to have a large size main used for individual services. It is not unusual, but there would have to be certain standards when connecting. It is more common particularly in large cities. Mr. Bernard commented that he needed to read a policy before approving it, and questioned the fiscal impact to the Town. There are several unknown costs, one being the maintenance on lines that previously did not have connections as well as the frequency that this situation might occur. Typically the homeowners would pay a contractor for the initial installation. Mr. Thaler agreed that this would be better as a case by case situation; specifying that this would only be for those parcels by the pipe up to our tank. Could the State tell the homeowners that they can’t drill? If they hook up, what rate would they pay? Metering a 5 acre parcel, would they be paying a metered rate? Staff responded that the state would not let them drill and that there would be a meter; however it would be policy to determine the rate on these instances. Mr. Condron mentioned that this was precisely the reason why we needed a water workshop. Ms. Davidson explained the story the property owners in question, thanking them for attending this meeting and for their patience. She explained that they are under a timeline and would like to move forward, and asked the Board for direction to assist them. Mr. Russell mentioned the legal issues with approaching this issue in a case by case basis stem from concern over possible discrimination in the process. The bright side of a policy is that they are public. The State Engineer doesn’t want to allow wells in a striking distance of a water system. We want to show that we are good stewards of our water and that we have something in place for these requests. If there is no policy in place after this meeting then the standard of evaluating it at a case by case basis would stand. As it is on the Agenda, we cannot approve or deny their request at this time. The question of will serve letters came up and whether we want these requests to always come to the Board. Mr. Russell stated that what the property owners are actually looking for is a will not serve letter. We can’t do that since it is not on the agenda as a request. If the Town does not have a policy in place the property owner will be asking for a will not serve letter, he would not recommend writing those letters. We want to show the State Engineer that we are good stewards of our water and don’t want to refuse either. Public Comment: ---PAGE BREAK--- Minden Town Board Minutes September 4, 2013 Page 8 of 9 Gary Leiss one of the managing members of the subdivision in question, noted that 10 years ago the County required that they purchase water rights of 2.06 acre feet for every house out there. Why should they do that if they are then required to connect, and pay that much more; they would then have to pay to put pipe in and connect. 90% of the property owners including these people do not want to be on the water system; this will just upset a lot of East Valley. Mr. Condron said it is a requirement of the state engineer; we are not in the business of requiring someone to hook up. Mr. Leiss questioned the need for a policy when the Town could just send a letter to the state engineer. Leslie Burquest, a resident looking to build in the Aurora Subdivision, wanted to express her thanks to the people of Minden and the staff. She said they had no idea they would be precedence case for this issue. She explained that they were interested in the property because it had partial utilities and they would be able to drill a well, just as their neighbors have. They have a lot that is 700 feet long, the house would be 400 feet from the back of the property, uphill and across Amber Way to where the Town’s water main is. The County put this on hold until they figured out what to do about the water. The Contractor’s bill to hook into the main is the same as drilling a well; that doesn’t include the connection fees and bills. They did not want to hook in since they have water rights already and would like to drill a well. The State said they need a will not serve on principal and wants Minden to make a decision. They said that there is a time clock ticking on a building permit and felt like the property is devalued by not being able to use the water rights that we purchased. Mr. Condron apologized for them being caught in the middle, but that the Town of Minden will be unable to serve them in their time frame, as we are just not in the position to move forward on this issue. Bob Pohlman agreed with the Chairman that there is a need for a water workshop. Ms. Davidson apologized from the administrative staff’s perspective that we didn’t anticipate the complexity of this request. Mr. McMillan stated that the water line was approved by the property owners before being put in. It was beneficial for providing fire service and hydrants; nothing was mentioned about us providing water. He questioned why the State Engineer is dictating what we do; property owners are entitled to water without paying sky high connection fees. Mr. Stephans reiterated that he felt this should be on a one on one basis; he expressed concerns over forcing people to hook into when they don’t want to. He did not want to approve any policy that he could not read. Mr. Thaler asked if the State is requiring them to hook up and if we don’t, does it negatively affect us? Mr. Scott explained that they have the right to require hook up, but won’t if the utility is not willing or able, or the costs are excessive. Mr. Condron stated that if we are not ready to approve a policy tonight we need to move forward. Mr. Russell explained that the Board cannot make a decision or request will serve or will not serve letters if they do not have a policy. These property owners can simply know that they are out of the Town’s service area and we do not need to take a stance on that. If a request is made in general to hook up, it will be dealt with when the request is made. We cannot as a Board, agree that the Town Manager will issue refuse to serve letters without an initial request to be served. Bernard/Stangle moved to deny a request to adopt a Town of Minden policy permitting parcels outside of the Town boundary to connect to the Town Water system subject to payment of existing Town water system connection fees, review and approval of the connection details by the Town Engineer and direct supervision by Town staff at the time the physical connection is made. Motion was denied unanimously. ---PAGE BREAK--- Minden Town Board Minutes September 4, 2013 Page 9 of 9 5. For possible action: Discussion and possible action to 1) approve, approve with conditions, or modify the form for the 2013 evaluation of the Minden Town Manager; and if the same is approved or approved with conditions, 2) to appoint a representative to collect the evaluations of each Board member as well as the Town Manager for presentation/approval at the next regular meeting of the Minden Town Board. Appearance by Steve Thaler, Member of the Minden Board. Mr. Thaler deferred to Mr. Russell to explain the item, Mr. Russell explained that the agreement with the Town Manager requires that at the beginning of each year goals are set, and evaluated at the end of the year, for use as a measuring tool to evaluate performance. This evaluation is to be conducted as close to the end of the contract as possible; her contract expires around November 16, 2013. He amended the evaluation form to focus on those goals and priorities. His recommendation to the Board, if they approved the form, is to select a representative to collect these forms before the next meeting and present the results. The Board can then vote, discuss and deliberate a formal evaluation and discuss any possible merit increase. That merit increase will then be contingent on whether the Board extends the Town Managers agreement. At that meeting, the Board can then further vote to extend the contract if they desire. If the agreement is extended, he recommended they could then adopt priorities and expectations. Mr. Thaler said if the Board decides to extend the contract they can look at it with the new format when creating the new goals and objectives. Mr. Stephans thanked them for shortening it and holding her accountable, short and sweet. Mr. Bernard said he thought this is a narrow way to do this and we need a more broad way of doing it. Mr. Russell stated the contract is based on Ms. Davidson’s job description. The performance evaluation is separate and is based on the goals and priorities set forth by the Board and the Town. Mr. Thaler explained that the hope was that we can use the evaluation for the Board to see how we are evaluating her on a one on one Board member basis. Separately, there is a contract that says 3 votes and she is gone; the contract does not say that just because she has a good evaluation that the Board cannot vote her out. She can also use the evaluation to get that verbal feedback from each of the Board Members that she needs to move forward. Mr. Bernard expressed his frustration that he will still tie the evaluation to the contract and that this does not accurately measure her total job performance. Mr. Thaler asked whether or not a Board member is going to connect the data or the attorney. His recommendation is that Mr. Russell does it. Mr. Russell explained that they evaluating a legal document and they have attorney privileges to discuss it. No Public Comment. Thaler/Stephans moved to approve the form for the 2013 evaluation of the Minden Town Manager; and to appoint the Town Counsel to collect the evaluations of each Board member as well as the Town Manager for presentation/approval at the next regular meeting of the Minden Town Board. Motion approved unanimously. Final Public Comment: None Mr. Condron asked the Board if there were any items that the other members would like to see on the next agenda. Mr. Thaler requested the Street Closure Policy be addressed. Ms. Davidson mentioned the Water Workshop, which the chairman can schedule if he chooses. ADJOURNMENT: Ms. Stangle moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:50pm