Packet

Mesquite City Council Regular City Council Meeting City Council Chambers TUESDAY, MARCH 14, 2017 - 5:00 PM Below is an agenda of all items scheduled to b e considered. Unless otherwise stated, items may b e taken out of the order presented on the agenda at the discretion of the Mayor and Council. Additionally, the Mayor and Council may comb ine two or more agenda items for consideration, and may remove an item from the agenda or delay discussion relating to an item on the agenda at any time. Pub lic comment is limited to three minutes per person.

Ceremonial Matters - INVOCATION - Pastor Patrick O'Neal, Mesquite Lutheran Church - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Public Comments During the Public Comment portion of the agenda comments must be limited to matters within the authority and jurisdiction of the City Council. Items raised under this portion of the Agenda cannot be deliberated or acted upon until the notice provisions of the Nevada Open Meeting Law have been met. If you wish to speak to the City Council at this time, please step up to the podium and clearly state your name. Comments are limited to 3 minutes in length. 1.

Public Comments

Consent Agenda Items on the Consent Agenda may not require discussion. These items may be a single motion unless removed at the request of the Mayor, City Council, or City Manager. 2.

Consideration of the approval of the March 14, 2017 Regular City Council 1 1

Meeting agenda and the February 7, 2017 Technical Review Meeting minutes. - Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Cover Sheet m02-07-17 TRM.docx 3.

Consideration of approval of: a) Notification of Budget Transfers b) Notification of Budget Amendments c) Notification of Bills Paid d) Purchase Orders - Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Cover Sheet Check Register - City Council Agenda 02.13.17 to 02.26.17.pdf Combined Budget Trsfrs & POs for Council.pdf

4.

Consideration of Approval of a Liquor Catering License for Los Lupes, located at 312 W. Mesquite Blvd. - Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Cover Sheet Mesquite Municipal Code.pdf LOS LUPES APP.pdf

5.

Consideration of Approval of an agreement with SADA Systems, Inc. for Document Management Software. - Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Cover Sheet CityofMesquite-AODocs Ordering Document.pdf AODocs Overview - City of Mesquite.pdf 2 2

Department Reports 6.

Mayor's Comments

7.

City Council and Staff Reports

Administrative Items 8.

Consideration of a management classification and compensation system and other matters properly related thereto. - Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Cover Sheet September 27, 2016 Agenda Item.pdf Classification and Compensation Study 11.2016.pdf Council Briefing 3.14.2017.pptx

9.

Consideration to approve emergency recruitment and hiring of 2 Firefighter Paramedics. - Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Cover Letter MFR Justification Letter - Personnel.pdf

10.

Consideration for Adoption of Bill No. 512 as Ordinance No.512 an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Mesquite, Nevada, amending Title 1 of the Mesquite Municipal Code “Administration” Chapter 11 “Personnel Policies” amending Section 2 “Purpose”; Section 7 “Adoption of personnel policies” and other matters properly related thereto. - Public Hearing - Discussion and Possible Action Cover Sheet Bill 512 (1).docx Chapter 11 Personnel Policies.pdf 3 3

11.

Consideration of Adoption of Bill No. 513 as Ordinance No.513 an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Mesquite, Nevada, amending Title 5 of the Mesquite Municipal Code “Police Regulations”; amending Chapter 1 “Misdemeanors”; adding Section 14 “Misuse or abuse of city property or services” and other matters properly related thereto. - Public Hearing - Discussion and Possible Action Cover Sheet Bill 513 Misuse of City Property or Services.doc

12.

Consideration for the Introduction of a Bill 514 which will officially create the Virgin Valley Community Educational Advisory Board (CEAB) as noted in Resolution 914 approved on December 13, 2016. - Discussion and Possible Action Cover Sheet Resolution 914.pdf Bill 514.docx

Public Comments During the Public Comment portion of the agenda comments must be limited to matters within the authority and jurisdiction of the City Council. Items raised under this portion of the Agenda cannot be deliberated or acted upon until the notice provisions of the Nevada Open Meeting Law have been met. If you wish to speak to the City Council at this time, please step up to the podium and clearly state your name. Comments are limited to 3 minutes in length. 13.

Public Comments

Adjournment 14.

Adjournment

4 4

Note: Please b e advised that the Standing Rules of the City Council are attached for your information. The Standing Rules govern the conduct of City Council Meetings. These Standing Rules may b e acted upon and utilized b y the Mayor and City Council at any City Council Meeting. To ob tain any or all supporting materials for this Agenda, please contact the Clerk's Office at 702-346-5295. Memb ers of the pub lic who are disab led and require special assistance or accommodation at the meeting are requested to notify the City Clerk’s Office -City Hall in writing at 10 E. Mesquite Blvd., Mesquite, NV, 89027 or b y calling 346-5295 twenty-four hours in advance of the meeting.

THIS NOTICE AND AGENDA HAS BEEN POSTED ON OR BEFORE 9:00 AM ON THE THIRD WORKING DAY BEFORE THE MEETING AT THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS: 1. Mesquite City Hall, 10 E. Mesquite Blvd., Mesquite, Nevada 2. Mesquite Community & Senior Center, 102 W. Old Mill Road, Mesquite, Nevada 3. Mesquite Post Office, 510 W. Mesquite Blvd., Mesquite, Nevada 4. Mesquite Lib rary, 121 W. First North, Mesquite, Nevada The agenda is also availab le on the Internet at http://www.mesquitenv.gov and http://nv.gov In accordance with Federal law and U.S. Department of Agriculture policy, the City of Mesquite is prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice), or (202) 720-6382 (TDD).

RULES OF PROCEDURE 1.

Authority

1.1 NRS 266.240 provides that the Council may determine its own rules of procedure for meetings. The following set of rules shall be in effect upon their adoption by the Council and until such time as they are amended or new rules are adopted in the manner provided by these rules. 2.

General Rules

2.1. Public Meetings: All meetings of the Council shall be open to the public, expect those provided in NRS 241 and 288. The agenda and backup material shall be open to public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office. 2.2 Quorum: A majority of the members of the Council shall constitute a quorum and be necessary for the transaction of business. If a quorum is not present, those in attendance will be named and they shall adjourn to a later time. 2.3

Compelling Attendance: The Council may adjourn from day to day to compel attendance of absent members.

2.4 Minutes: A written account of all proceedings of the Council shall be kept by the City Clerk and shall be entered into the official records of the Council. 2.5 Right to Floor: Any member desiring to speak shall be recognized by the chair, and shall confine his remarks to the item under consideration. 2.6 City Manager: The City M anager or his designee shall attend all meetings of the Council. The City M anager may make recommendations to the Council and shall have the right to take part in all discussions of the Council, but shall have no vote. 2.7. City Attorney: The City Attorney or Deputy City Attorney shall attend all meetings of the Council and shall, upon request, given an opinion, either written or verbal, on questions of the law.

5

5

2.8 City Clerk: The City Clerk or Deputy City Clerk shall attend all meetings of the Council and shall keep the official minutes and perform such other duties as required by the Council. 2.9 Officers and Staff: Department heads of the City, when there is pertinent business from their departments on the Council agenda, shall attend such Council meetings upon request of the City M anager. 2.10 Rules of Order: “Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised” 10th Edition shall govern the proceedings of the Council in all cases, provided they are not in conflict with these rules.

3.

Types of Meetings

3.1 Regular M eeting: The Council shall meet in the Council Chambers for all regular meetings. Regular Council meetings will be held on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month. If the second or fourth Tuesday falls on or near a holiday or falls on any day wherein it is determined a quorum may not be available, the Council may provide for another meeting time. 3.2 Special M eetings: Special meetings may be called by the M ayor or by a majority of the City Council. The call for a special meeting shall be filed with the City Clerk in written form, expect that an announcement of a special meeting during any regular meeting at which all members are present shall be sufficient notice of such special meeting. The call for a special meeting shall specify the day, the hour, and the location of the special meeting and shall list the subject or subjects to be considered. 3.3 Adjourned Meeting: Any meeting of the Council may be adjourned to a later date and time, provided that no adjournment shall be for a longer period than until the next regular meeting. 3.4 Workshop and Study Sessions: The Council may meet in workshops or study sessions to review upcoming projects, receive progress reports on current projects, or receive other similar information from the City M anager, provided that all discussions thereon shall be informal and open to the public. 3.5

Executive Sessions: Closed meetings may be held in accordance with NRS 241 and 288.

4.

Duties of Presiding Officer

4.1 Presiding Officer: The M ayor, if present, shall preside at all meetings of the Council. In the M ayor’s absence, the M ayor Pro Tem shall preside. In the absence of both the M ayor and M ayor Pro Tem, the Council members present shall elect a Presiding Officer. 4.2 Preservation of Order: The Presiding Officer shall preserve order and decorum; prevent attacks of a personal nature or the impugning of members’ motives, and confine members in debate to the question under discussion. 4.3 Points of Order: The Presiding Officer shall determine all points of order, subject to the right of any member to appeal to the Council. If any appeal is taken, the question shall be: “Shall the decision of the Presiding Officer be sustained?”

5.

Order of Business and Agenda

5.1 Agenda: The order of business of each meeting shall be as contained in the agenda in accordance with NRS 241 prepared by the City Clerk and approved by the City M anager. The agenda shall be delivered to members of the Council at least three (3) working days preceding the meeting to which it pertains. 5.2 Special Interest/Presentation Items: Unless otherwise approved by the City M anager, and in order to provide for the effective administration of City Council business, a maximum of four (4) items of special interest or presentation shall be scheduled on one agenda. Special Interest/Presentation items must appear on the agenda and it is not appropriate for presentations to be made during the public comment portion of the meeting.

6 6

6.

Creation of Committees, Boards and Commissions

6.1 Resolution: The Council may by resolution create committees, boards, and commission to assist in the operation of the City government with such duties as the Council may specify, which shall not be inconsistent with law. 6.2 Membership and Selection: M embership and selection of members shall be as provided by the Council if not specified by law. Any committee, board, or commission so created shall cease to exist upon the accomplishment of the special purpose for which it was created, as provided in the initial resolution, or when abolished by a majority vote of the Council. No committee, board or commission shall have powers other than advisory to the Council or to the City M anager, except as otherwise provided by law. 6.3 Removal: The Council may remove any member which they have appointed to any board, committee or commission by a vote of at least a majority of the Council. Such appointed members will be removed automatically if they fail consistently (three or more unexcused absences) to attend meetings.

7.

Voting

7.1

All voting procedures shall be in accordance with Parliamentary Authority.

7.2 Point of Order: Any Council member may raise a Point of Order if s/he perceives a breach of the Council’s procedural rules and insists on the enforcement of the rule by the Presiding Officer. A Point of Order take precedence over any main motion, is not debatable, is not amendable, but may be superseded by a motion to table the item over which the Point of Order was raised, and is ruled on immediately by the Presiding Officer. 7.3 Point of Information: This is a request by a Council member, directed to the Presiding Officer or appropriate individual for information relevant to the pending item. A Point of Information takes precedence over a main motion, is not debatable, is not amendable, is not superseded by other motions, and is ruled on for appropriateness by the Presiding Officer. 7.4

Abstentions: A member may abstain from voting for any reason s/he deems appropriate.

7.5 Failure of Affirmative Motion: The failure of a motion calling for affirmative action is not the equivalent of the passage of a motion calling for the opposite negative action. The failure of such affirmative motion constitutes no action. 7.6 Failure of Negative Motion: The failure of a motion calling for a negative action is not the equivalent of the passage of a motion calling for the opposite affirmative action. The failure of such a negative motion constitutes no action. 7.7 Lack of Passage of a M otion: In some instances (maps in particular, per NRS) lack of passage of a motion may result in the item being “deemed approved.” In other instances no action may result in confusion and complication for the applicant. In all cases the City Council will strive to achieve a decision or action. 8.

Citizens’ Rights

8.1 Addressing the City Council: Any person desiring to address the Council by oral communication shall first secure the permission of the Presiding Officer. 8.2 Time Limit: Each person addressing the Council shall step to the microphone, shall give his/her name and residence address in an audible tone of voice for the record and, unless further time is granted by the Presiding Officer, shall limit the time of his/her comments to three (3) minutes. 8.3 Public Comment Content: The presiding officer or the majority of City Council may prohibit comment if the content of the comments is a topic that is not relevant to, or within the authority of, the public body, or if the content of the comments is

7 7

willfully disruptive of the meeting by being irrelevant, repetitious, slanderous, offensive, inflammatory, irrational, or amounting to personal attacks or interfering with the rights of other speakers. 8.4 Disruptive Conduct: Any person who willfully disrupts a meeting to the extent that its orderly conduct is made impractical may be removed from the meeting by order of the Presiding Officer or majority of the City Council. A person willfully disrupts a meeting when s/he (1) uses physical violence, threatens the use of physical violence or provokes the use of physical violence, or (2) continues to use loud, boisterous, unruly, or provocative behavior after being asked to stop, which behavior is determined by the Presiding Officer or a majority of the City Council present to be disruptive to the orderly conduct of the meeting, or (3) fails to comply with any lawful decision or order of the Presiding Officer or of a majority of the City Council relating to the orderly conduct of the meeting. 8.5 Written Communications: a. In General: Interested parties or their authorized representatives may address the Council by written communication in regard to any matter concerning the City’s business or over which the Council has control at any time by direct mail to Council members, email, or by addressing it to the City Clerk and copies will be distributed to the Council members. b. At City Council M eetings: Except as provided in subsection c, written communications will not be read at City Council meetings, but will be attached to the item as part of the record, tallied, and reported by the City Clerk as generally in favor of or against the proposition. c. Exceptions: A written communication to the City Council may be read by City staff at a City Council meeting when (1) the person making the written communication has asked it be read aloud, (2) the person is unavailable to be at the meeting due to emergency or illness, (3) the written communication can be read in an ordinary cadence within three minutes, and (4) the person’s name appears on the written communication and will be read into the record. 9.

S uspension and Amendment of These Rules

9.1 Suspension of these Rules: Any provision of these rules not governed by law may be temporarily suspended by a majority vote of the City Council. 9.2 Amendment of these Rules: These rules may be amended, or new rules adopted, by a majority vote of all members of the City Council, provided that the proposed amendments or new rules have been introduced into the records at a prior City Council meeting.

8 8

City Council Agenda Item Report Submitted by: Tracy Beck Submitting Department: City Manager Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: Public Comments Recommendation: Petitioner: Andy Barton, City Manager Is this a budgeted item? No Fiscal Impact:

Background: Contract Bid Expires On: Attachments: 

9

City Council Agenda Item 2 Submitted by: Tracy Beck Submitting Department: City Clerk Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: Consideration of the approval of the March 14, 2017 Regular City Council Meeting agenda and the February 7, 2017 Technical Review Meeting minutes. - Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Recommendation: Approve the March 14, 2017 Regular City Council Meeting agenda and the February 7, 2017 Technical Review Meeting minutes. Petitioner: Tracy E. Beck, City Clerk Is this a budgeted item? No Fiscal Impact:

Background:

Contract Bid Expires On:

Attachments:  m02-07-17 TRM.docx

10

Mesquite Technical Review Meeting City Hall Training Room 10 E. Mesquite Blvd. Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Minutes of a scheduled meeting of the City Council held on Tuesday, January 7, 2017 at 1:30 PM. In Attendance were Mayor Allan S. Litman, Council members Geno Withelder, Rich Green and David Ballweg. Also in attendance were City Manager Andy Barton, City Attorney Robert Sweetin, Development Services Richard Secrist, Public Works Director Bill Tanner, City Clerk Tracy Beck, additional City Staff and 15 citizens. Mayor Litman called the meeting to order and excused Council members George Rapson and Brian Wursten. (Note: This meeting was tape-recorded and will remain on file in the office of the City Clerk for four (4) years public examination). Below is an agenda of all items scheduled to be considered. Unless otherwise stated, items may be taken out of the order presented on the agenda at the discretion of the Mayor and Council. Additionally, the Mayor and Council may combine two or more agenda items for consideration, and may remove an item from the agenda or delay discussion relating to an item on the agenda at any time. Public comment is limited to three minutes per person.

Public Comments 1)

Public Comment

Minutes: Mayor Litman opened up the meeting to Public Comment. There were no speakers.

Consent Agenda 2)

Consideration of approval the February 14, 2017 Regular City Council Meeting Agenda; the January 10, 2017 Regular City Council Meeting minutes; and the January 17, 2017 Technical Review Meeting minutes.

- Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action

Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 1

11

Minutes: Mayor Litman read this item by its title and asked if there were any questions or comments. There were none. 3)

Consideration of approval of: a) Notification of Budget Transfers b) Notification of Budget Amendments c) Notification of Bills Paid d) Purchase Orders e) December 2016 Financial Statements

- Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Minutes: Mayor Litman read this item by its title and asked if there were any questions or comments. There were none.

4)

Consideration of approval of an amendment to the Granicus service agreement.

- Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Minutes: Mayor Litman read this item by its title and asked if there were any questions or comments. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: Are we going anywhere with getting this corrected? I mean, we are going to buy more services. Minutes: Dirk Marshall: Getting which corrected? Minutes: Council member Ballweg: Well, the basest we've got now, not being able to join the meetings and stuff like at the regular meetings. I mean, we have been having issues with it. I don’t know, we're going with additional services, and I think it is questionable whether this has been working well or not. I’m just saying we continually have problems. Minutes: Dirk Marshall: We'll look into it. Minutes: Mayor Litman: In our last Regular City Council Meeting, we had 2/3rds hand votes, because it slows the progress.

Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 2

12

Minutes: Dirk Marshall: There has been an issue with the new Council members being in the roll call. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: Well, actually, I was fine, and it was George who was having a problem. Brian was having a problem. I was working fine. I would like to clear up what we have now before we take on another challenge.

5)

Consideration of Approval of Environmental Covenants between City of Mesquite and Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP).

- Public Comments - Discussion and Possible Action

Minutes: Mayor Litman read this item by its title and asked if there were any questions or comments. Minutes; Council member Ballweg: This is Oasis. This doesn’t restrict us in any way from doing anything with the road. It is just a notice that the contamination exists. Minutes: Mr. Tanner: It is, and it is a notice that it exists at the 35-foot level. So if we do any modifications to that roadway, we should be all right. If we get down below that, then we have some issues. Keith is here with Stewart Environmental. If there are any other questions, he could explain more. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: I just want to know is this noticed as part of the deed. How is this recorded? I mean if we come back later and 10 years from now say this restriction is on here. Minutes: Mr. Tanner: It is recorded with our Assessor’s office. On the parcel map, it will always have that recorded document attached to that parcel. Now, those two parcels, Aaron might be able to clarify it, but our two parcels are a public right of way. Sometimes it’s hard for the public to get in the assessor’s page and look at public right of ways. But because it is a public right of way, it is going to show up on those recorded documents. Now on the private section on the Oasis on the south parcel and on the north parcel, those covenants will show up on their assessor’s stuff that the public will be able to see. So it’s just a little bit of a difference in public right of ways. They don’t explain exactly who the public right of way belongs to. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: But this contamination, this plume as they describe it, I think that is what they describe it as. It’s stable now? I mean, it’s being contained? They don’t expect it to move or that’s not part of the Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 3

13

Minutes: Mr. Tanner: No, and what’s has happened is over the years, and that’s why I added in some of those documents. It shows where the NDEP has come back with a recommendation that the way to close out this project is the plume has been identified. The location is where it is at, and they have not figured out why it’s not being eliminated, but it’s a 35-foot depth, so the only with recording these covenants is it’s not moving. It’s not going anywhere, but anything that went down and was constructed in that depth, people would know and have to work with that. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: That would mitigate any contamination from that. Minutes: Mr. Tanner: Correct, Keith? Minutes: Keith Stewart, Stewart Environmental: Yeah, and the City would not be responsible for those costs. They would be borne by the Oasis and the responsible parties that caused it originally. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: And we don’t see any issues with any of the normal construction or maintenance of the streets that we would ever be impacted by that? I mean, even if we would go and put some type of conduits in or something like that, we are not going to get down to the 35-foot level? Minutes: Mr. Tanner: No, we wouldn’t even get close, so we should be good. 6)

Consideration of Bid Award for the Riverside Road Waterline Replacement and Overlay Project.

- Public Comments - Discussion and Possible Action

Minutes: Mayor Litman read this item by its title and asked if there were any questions or comments.

Minutes: Mr. Tanner: That is another agenda item that I have got. We opened bids yesterday. I don’t know that the bid documents won’t be in your Technical Review. but they will be in your Council packet. We had 4 bidders. The apparent low bidder will be Mesquite General Contracting. I think their bid was $1,925,000. The next bidder was J&J Engineering; they were like $40,000 higher at $2,010,000. Meadow Valley Contractors was $2,554,000 and Las Vegas Paving at $2,150,000. Now, this project will be administrated through the City of Mesquite. However, another item on the agenda is an Inter-Local Agreement with the Virgin Valley Disposal. A certain portion of this will be their responsibility. I think on these bid documents, our Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 4

14

responsibility for the reconstruction of Riverside Road will be about $702,000. In our exchange with NDOT, that agreement has been finalized to the degree that NDOT will be signing that on the 13th of February, and then at some point in the future, they will be forwarding to us $670,000. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: So we have a net, then, of about $40,000? Minutes: Mr. Tanner: We do. We have $40,000 that we are going to end up probably paying for, and actually we are taking that out of road reconstruction fund. We budget for these types of things in that fund. Now what we did on that project is we went through and took all the commercial driveways for commercial businesses, and we brought them up to compliance. What we didn’t do is change out any sidewalk, because I didn’t know what the cost was. I wanted to stay within a reasonable number. Now that we know what that number is, we have another couple of hundred thousand we can work with to upgrade broken sidewalk, sidewalk that needs to be replaced, curb’s that are broke. So we will be evaluating that a little bit more as we move forward and probably do a change order for that. Ultimately in the end we should have when this project is over is the water line upgraded, Riverside Road repaved, the manholes to a reasonable level, and then we have another item I want to discuss later on is the striping of that road. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: And have a big notice that can’t cut the street for 5 years. Minutes: Mr. Tanner: Every agreement we enter into - we just had that discussion today with RTC, is the funding from RTC requires, it's in our agreement, to have a no-cut policy for 5 years. We are working right now with the school district and the fire department, because we did Valley View here 3 or 4 years ago, and they want to cut that street and put a water line in, so we are going to have to evaluate that. In order to put fire protection into the high school, we may have to have some kind of road cut on that. But our normal policy is 5 years. Minutes: Council member Withelder: Mayor, can I say something about Riverside Road? I'm going to direct this to Mr. Sweetin. About two weeks ago, I was at a meeting down at the Elk’s Lodge on some proprietary stuff, and the Clark County school bus stops within 50 feet of the driveway of that, and I talked to Chief Tanner about this on 4 or 5 occasions, and he’s tried to communicate this to Clark County School District. Parents pull into the Elk Club parking lot to pick up their kids and, of course, there was a collision, and fortunately no child was hit. No one was hurt, but someone goes around the bus and ran into another truck. If we can get the school district to alleviate that stopping at that particular location, it’s eventually going to save someone’s life, because it’s dangerous as hell. Pardon my French. Minutes: Mr. Sweetin: Is it for High School, Middle School or Elementary?

Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 5

15

Minutes: Council member Withelder: No, it is Elementary and Middle School, and Jensen Drive is just around the corner, and I talked to Chief about it, and he says that they cannot use Jensen Drive because it’s a private street, but there’s got to be some way to alleviate that stop, because somebody is going to get killed. Minutes: Mr. Tanner: Let me throw some more information into here. Jensen Drive was accepted by the City years ago, Council, to move that to a public street. What happened is that fell back on Coyote Willows and that association that they needed to provide to us documents dedicating that street back to us. That happened last October. Finally, I sent a letter to Coyote Willows that said, look, if this isn’t done in 60 days, you are getting the street back, because we are maintaining it. All of those documents have been done, and they are recorded. So probably right now what needs to happen is a little bit of pressure put on the School District. Once the assessor’s page shows that as public, they should be able to move that bus stop to Jensen Drive. That’s what prevented it was it was showing on the assessor’s pages as private. Minutes: Council member Withelder: And there is plenty of room for the school buses to turn around and get back onto Riverside just by accessing that loop there. Because somebody is absolutely going to get hurt big time there, and that stop, that’s just dangerous.

Department Reports 7)

Mayor's Comments

Minutes: Mayor Litman stated he had nothing at this time. 8)

City Council and Staff Reports

Minutes: Mayor Litman asked Council and Staff if they will have anything.

Minutes: Council member Withelder: I will have some Little League.

Resolutions & Proclamations 9)

Consideration of Approval of Resolution #917, an Inter Local Agreement to grant Community Development Block Grant funds to the City of Mesquite for Program Services for Fiscal Year 2016/2017.

- Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 6

16

Minutes: Mayor Litman read this item by its title and asked if there any questions or comments. Minutes: Nick Montoya: This is the basic contract from Clark County CDBG Grant for the next 5-year cycle in 2015 to 2019 to receive our funds that we have applied for through the CDBG. 10)

Consideration of Approval of Resolution No. 918, adopting an Inter-local Contract (No 923) between the City of Mesquite and the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada (RTC) for Design and Construction of Project 191D-CSF; Complete Streets Program.

- Public Comments - Discussion and Possible Action Minutes: Mayor Litman read this item by its title and asked if there were any questions or comments.

Minutes: Mr. Tanner: This is a RTC funding item that came to us from Regional Transportation on the Complete Streets. I think if you all remember, last year we did a Complete Streets Program that put in the bicycle, Share the Road with Bicycles. That was a $12,000 item that we got through the Complete Streets Program, which is where you donate, when you register your vehicle, a dollar. Anyway, that funding came to us last year. Mike Kent called me in late January or midJanuary and said that Boulder City and Mesquite, we alternate on that each year. Boulder City didn’t have a program together, so we got with Travis and we had him put a program together, and we identified some five crosswalks in the Valley that we think needs to have a lot more done to visualize where people are crossing it. One is at the Ace Hardware. We kind of ranked them. I put this in there, so if Council had an item that they thought maybe we ranked them wrong, or they rather see something somewhere else, we can move them, but right now we have five locations. We probably only have enough funding here for two locations. So we are kind of prioritizing Ace Hardware, possibly Arrowhead, because we believe – Hafen Lane, we are going to take care of that one as we do the construction on the Riverside Road reconstruction project. So that’s kind of where we are at with that. The $24,000 would go to probably Arrowhead and Ace Hardware. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: Don’t we already have flashing lights at Arrowhead? Minutes: Mr. Tanner: We do. We have flashing lights, because it is a school zone. So you start way back and forward, and what we are looking at now is Minutes: Council member Ballweg: This would be a pedestrian?

Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 7

17

Minutes: Mr. Tanner: It would be, and so when pedestrians would hit that you would have the lights as we have on Pioneer Blvd. School zone would stay intact, but then the pedestrian lights would also be there which would enhance the school crossings in the mornings. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: You are going to be basically accepting recommendations at that time for our priorities. Is that what you want us to do? Minutes: Mr. Tanner: At the Council meeting, yeah, if you have a different priority, and I’m trying to remember if we prioritized them here. Did we? Minutes: Council member Ballweg: There is a map here, 1 through 5. Minutes: Mr. Tanner: Right, now they are prioritized as Ace Hardware is 1. Riverside Road and Hafen is 2. Arrowhead is 3. Then we have the two on Hafen Lane. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: But you said number 2 would be taken care of with other funding. So we can kind of throw that one out of the mix. 11) Consideration of Approval of Resolution No. 919, Adopting an Inter-local Contract between the City of Mesquite and the Virgin Valley Water District for the Riverside Road Waterline Replacement and Overlay Project. - Public Comments - Discussion and Possible Action Minutes: Mayor Litman read this item by its title and asked if there were any questions or comments. Minutes: Mayor Litman: That pretty much dovetails with the other one. Minutes: Mr. Tanner: It does. It’s just the Agreement that Virgin Valley Water District will pay us for their portion of the water improvements on the Riverside Road project, and that’s roughly $1.2 million and some change is their responsibility. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: The City is going to administer so they will be reimbursing the City or are they going to make their payments directly?

Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 8

18

Minutes: Mr. Tanner: No, it gets a little bit confusing and then you get contracts. The City will administrate it. We will bill out the Water District, and if they don’t pay us, we will hunt them down.

Zoning 12)

Consideration of the Architectural and Site Plan Review Case No. ASR-16-007 (REV Service Center) to build a 76,504 square foot RV Service Center, including an RV Park, at 575 Commerce Circle in the Mesquite Technology and Commerce Center, in the Light Industrial (IR-1) Zone.

- Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Minutes: Mayor Litman read this item by its title and asked if there were any questions or comments. Minutes: Mr. Secrist: This Architectural and Site Plan review case is coming to the Council because the site is over 10 acres. If the properties are less than 10 acres, than it can be just administrative approval by Staff. They are also asking for a conditional use permit, and that of course is required to be approved by Council at a public hearing. The use permit is to allow taller building than the normal code allows. The height limit is 2 stories with 35 feet, and they want to be able to go up to 45 feet with their building, so that’s that item. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: That is predominately that one feature in the front there that adds a height to it? Minutes Mr. Secrist: That's correct. Minutes: Council member Withelder: When are they planning to break ground there? Minutes: Scott Carter, KGA Architecture: I would say late Spring.

13)

Consideration of the Conditional Use Permit Case No. CUP-16-005 (REV Service Center) to approve a 45-foot building height on an RV Service Center, at 575 Commerce Circle in the Mesquite Technology and Commerce Center, in the Light Industrial (IR-1) Zone.

- Public Hearing - Discussion and Possible Action Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 9

19

Minutes: Mayor Litman read this item by its title and asked if there were any questions or comments. There were none.

Administrative Items 14)

Consideration of the introduction of Bill No. 510 amending Mesquite Municipal Code, Title 8 Flood Control Ordinance, by replacing Section 8-1 Part II: entitled “Excavation and Grading” with a new Section 8-2 entitled “Excavation and Grading Standards,” and to provide for other matters properly relating thereto.

- Discussion and Possible Action Minutes: Mayor Litman read this item by its title and asked if there were any questions or comments. Minutes: Mr. Secrist: This is an update or clean-up, I guess, of the City’s grading and excavation regulations in the Flood Control Ordinance. Basically it will take part 2 of chapter 1 and create its own chapter out of it, a chapter 2. It updates the information in there, references the current National Coastal Geodetic Survey Coordinates. We've still got old coordinate in there that have never been changed or never been updated to the current ones. It adds a lot of references and new definitions, things dealing with National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, Clean Water Act stuff. Basically, we see it as primarily a clean-up, a few minor amendments, changes that will – one that will help developers that over excavate. Right now, you are required to do exploration pits on each side before a building permit is issued, soil exploration. But if a developer routinely over ex's down to 10 feet, then the new Code will say that they don’t have to do any further explorations. So it’s things like that. It’s just cleaning up, adding some additional definitions and references, requiring a little bit more information be provided to the City with their grading permit. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: I have a question. Looking at the actual document, I don’t know, they are not numbered, so I don’t quite know where to go to, how to reference, but you got Strong Water Pollution Prevention Plan, the SWPPP. This is for grading and excavation. This doesn’t apply to parking lot draining and litigation on parking lot drainage or anything does it? Minutes: Mr. Secrist: Not specifically, no. The SWPPP or storm water pollution prevention plan is a plan or document that is required to be submitted to NDEP when they apply for a grading permit. It shows how they are going to mitigate any run off, erosion, how they are handling erosion control. Are they going to place berms at a certain location to get the flows to go a certain way? Are they going to do something to make sure they are not tracking mud out onto the streets, all of those kinds of things. In the past, they were required to submit that to the Nevada NDEP, but they haven’t always given the City a copy of that. We just think it would be helpful if we got the same document that they received and see what their storm water pollution plan actually entails. It could apply to a parking lot.

Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 10

20

Minutes: Council member Ballweg: I got caught up on my parking lot after I was in, and they wanted to actually put interceptors in before it hit the storm drain run off, so now I’m going where did this all come from? So we made some declarations, but that’s becoming a – it was a state level deal. This is grading, so it really doesn’t have anything to do with the final site drainage, does it in parking lots and things? Minutes: Mr. Secrist: It is more during development. As development is occurring and making sure that while you’ve got this soil exposed during the grading operation that it’s not just eroding and creating flooding and problems on surrounding properties. Minutes: Mr. Tanner: There has been a proposal over the years, and that’s what you’re talking about, storm water permitting and treating that water. At one point in time, the National NPDES required states to do storm water permitting. At one point in time, we were scheduled to start to implement that in Mesquite when they implemented in Clark County, but I got a call from the State that says they are not going to push that through the rural areas at that time. This was back in 2012. So we haven’t moved forward. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: I got hit up about 2009, and they were worried about parking lots and oil run off and things like that, and they wanted interceptors to separate the oil and things, so I just want to make sure this is strictly grading. It doesn’t have anything to do to apply to that. So in general, do you see materially any extra costs with this upgrade in the – any significant upgrading costs for the grading with these revisions? Is there any big gotcha in there that is going to cause a problem? Minutes: Mr. Secrist: I don’t think so. We did meet early on with Legacy Construction, Henry Slack, one of their grading contractors, that does an awful lot of work in town. He gave us some input and some comments, had some questions, but think we have addressed those. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: I am just saying sometimes some of this specialty stuff; you can slip something in there that can be a real thorn in the side that costs a lot of money. It’s an insignificant sentence, but all of a sudden it creates a lot of problems. 15)

Consideration of the introduction of Bill No. 511 amending Mesquite Municipal Code Section 9-10-7 entitled “Sign Regulation For Residential Districts” by modifying the sign standards for Noncommercial Message signs; and Section 9-108 entitled “Sign Regulations for Commercial Districts” by modifying the sign standards for noncommercial message signs; and other matters properly related thereto.

Minutes: Mayor Litman read this item by its title and asked if there were any questions or comments.

Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 11

21

Minutes: Mr. Secrist: This is actually an amendment to the Political Signs. We had a code enforcement issue come up during this last presidential election. Under the existing ordinance, in residential areas, property owners are allowed to have two political signs on their property. I don’t know how number two was arrived at, but nonetheless that was the standard. Well, we had one neighbor complain about another who had more than two. Of course, his response, who is the City to tell me which candidates I can support and not. We decided at the time not to take any enforcement action. We agreed there was a significant First Amendment issue there that we just didn’t see that we wanted to kick over that hornet’s nest at the time. But we did tell all the property owners that were involved we would take a case to the Council, let them decide if it should remain the same, limit of two, or whether it should be increased. So the draft bill proposes to allow up to five signs in residential areas. The commercial areas were treated differently, because they had a noncommercial message on their existing commercial signs. But they are allowed additional area during the election itself. That is what this is dealing with. If the Council thinks that it ought to be left the way it is, then don’t approve it. If you think maybe there ought to be a little more leeway, so people can you know Minutes: Council member Ballweg: If there is an NRS Statue for common communities that allows each homeowner to display one sign for every candidate or issue. So it doesn't restrict you to a number, but if you are going to do a proposition or a question or a presidential candidate, a governor, it doesn’t give you a count. You can have one per issue or candidate. Minutes: Mr. Secrist: The way this is drafted, you can have up to five, but there is one caveat, and that is if it's blocking a site distance at a corner, or otherwise impairing vision or access, then we can require they take them down or move them or something. Minutes: Council member Ballweg: But there is an NRS for common interest communities that the Board cannot restrict anybody’s signs except for one per issue or candidate. So I guess that’s something we can deliberate at the time.

16)

Discussion and possible action regarding striping configurations and speed limit options for Riverside Road.

- Public Comments - Discussion and Possible Action Minutes: Mayor Litman read this item by its title and asked if there were any questions or comments. Minutes: Mr. Tanner: Cisco right along with the bid award and is taking over of Riverside Road from NDOT. We have several options in here which showed what the existing striping plan is. We showed you what a striping plan would be with bicycle lanes, and what striping would be like with bicycle lanes and shutting off parking on the east side of Riverside Road. They only put this in – we are not in a hurry for this. We are still going to get the construction done, but we Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 12

22

need to make a decision on how we want to stripe Riverside Road. Both the existing that leaves it the way it is, which kinds of puts those manholes up in down there in the wheel path. Option 1 will kind of change that. Option 2 leaves a buffer between the bike lane and the parking lane. Now, with these options, we put on there was we are recommending to lower the speed limit from 40 to 35 to allow ATV’s to use the travel lane. If we elected to leave that at 40, we need to address what we are going to do with ATV’s and put a dedicated lane for them. That’s why we are recommending to drop it down to 35, so that they can use Riverside. Minutes: Council member Withelder: Is that going to be all Riverside? Minutes: Mr. Tanner: All of Riverside Road. Minutes: Council member Withelder: Because I tell you, from Hafen Lane to the bridge to Bunkerville, it’s nothing but a speedway. These guys, they are doing 50/60 miles an hour once they get past Hafen Lane, and it’s going to turn into a death trap. It’s nasty. Minutes: Mr. Tanner: So the speed limit is 35. And actually, I think ATVs are slower than that. What it amounts to is you come down to enforcement. I mean, we have them – we are allowing them on from Hafen Lane to the bridge, cross the bridge. So now we are just suggesting that it goes to Mesquite Blvd., which would allow them – because you can cross the main arterial, so that they can go to Riverside Road and cross over Mesquite Blvd. It provides more access for the ATVs throughout our community without limiting them, and keep in mind, that comes with more enforcement and more problems. So that’s why we put this on there. We wanted to let everyone look at it and talk about it. Minutes: Mr. Anderson: I just want to help clarify. When you are looking at the cross sections, what we tried to do is the ones that have the little red circles, as you look at those, those are the locations of each manhole if you are driving down. So we went out there and actually polled the distance off of the curb, and so we were trying to look with the different striping options, if we could completely eliminate those, so they would be out of the wheel path. As you see, you have to shift that quite a bit over. With this Riverside Road project, we are going to be raising the manholes, so it should be just like every other road, but just to give you some sense of what those little circles are. Those are the location of every single manhole of where it would line up.

Public Comments 17)

Public Comment

Minutes: Mayor Litman opened up the meeting to Public Comment. There were no speakers.

Adjournment Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 13

23

18)

Adjournment

Minutes: Mayor Litman adjourned the meeting at 2:01 PM

____________________________ Allan S. Litman, Mayor

__________________________ Tracy E. Beck, City Clerk

Mesquite Technical Review Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2017; 1:30 PM Page 14

24

City Council Agenda Item 3 Submitted by: Dodie Melendez Submitting Department: Finance Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: Consideration of approval of: a) Notification of Budget Transfers b) Notification of Budget Amendments c) Notification of Bills Paid d) Purchase Orders - Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action

Recommendation: Approval of Budget Transfers, Budget Amendments, Bills Paid, and Purchase Orders. Petitioner: David Empey – Financial Director/City Treasurer Is this a budgeted item? No Fiscal Impact: See Attached Background: See Attached Contract Bid Expires On:

Attachments:  Check Register - City Council Agenda 02.13.17 to 02.26.17.pdf  Combined Budget Trsfrs & POs for Council.pdf

25

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017

1

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

Report Criteria: Report type: GL detail GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

02/17

02/14/2017

168744

Payee

11646 BEAU STRICKLER

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

021417

1

52-40-620

Total 168744:

.00

7,500.00

.00

7,500.00 7,500.00

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

1

10-54-281

.00

7,526.76

7,526.76

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

2

10-55-281

.00

2,305.80

2,305.80

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

3

10-57-281

.00

2,405.31

2,405.31

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

4

10-49-281

.00

3,554.74

3,554.74

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

5

10-63-281

.00

50.04

50.04

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

6

10-65-281

.00

698.86

698.86

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

7

10-66-281

.00

1,976.06

1,976.06

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

8

10-70-281

.00

828.70

828.70

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

9

10-76-281

.00

6,505.70

6,505.70

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

10

10-81-281

.00

17,931.49

17,931.49

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

11

10-82-281

.00

262.09

262.09

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

12

12-87-281

.00

1,281.12

1,281.12

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

13

16-71-281

.00

1,715.16

1,715.16

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

14

10-49-281

.00

343.95

343.95

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

15

52-40-280

.00

22,594.06

22,594.06

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

16

10-49-281

.00

376.62

376.62

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

17

10-65-280

.00

30,727.92

30,727.92

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

18

10-38-701

.00

156.22

156.22

02/17

02/16/2017

168745

4200 OVERTON POWER

2574

19

10-38-701

.00

1,264.00

1,264.00

Total 168745: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168746

13280 1000 BULBS.COM

W00216295

1

10-63-610

Total 168746:

.00

102,504.60 374.75

.00

374.75 374.75

02/17

02/21/2017

168747

3655 AIRGAS USA LLC

9056156233

1

10-57-615

.00

171.80

171.80

02/17

02/21/2017

168747

3655 AIRGAS USA LLC

9056619183

1

10-57-615

.00

210.94

210.94

02/17

02/21/2017

168747

3655 AIRGAS USA LLC

9059222991

1

10-57-615

.00

109.77

109.77

02/17

02/21/2017

168747

3655 AIRGAS USA LLC

9059700809

1

10-57-615

.00

172.05

172.05

02/17

02/21/2017

168747

3655 AIRGAS USA LLC

9942498728

1

10-57-615

.00

220.75

220.75

26 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168747:

.00

885.31

02/17

02/21/2017

168748

8756 ALSCO

LSTG34332

1

10-66-610

.00

30.50

02/17

02/21/2017

168748

8756 ALSCO

LSTG734024

1

16-71-480

.00

32.08

32.08

02/17

02/21/2017

168748

8756 ALSCO

LSTG735242

1

16-71-480

.00

113.31

113.31

02/17

02/21/2017

168748

8756 ALSCO

LSTG735246

1

10-60-310

.00

138.72

138.72

02/17

02/21/2017

168748

8756 ALSCO

LSTG735250

1

10-66-610

.00

46.20

46.20

Total 168748: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168749

15606 AMBER ORTEGA

021317

1

17-34-405

Total 168749:

.00

30.50

360.81 50.00

.00

50.00 50.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168750

14353 AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTOR

S086394953

1

10-66-245

.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168750

14353 AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTOR

S086867564

1

10-66-245

.00

291.38

291.38

02/17

02/21/2017

168750

14353 AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTOR

S086965732

1

10-66-245

.00

334.59

334.59

02/17

02/21/2017

168750

14353 AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTOR

S087084135

1

10-66-245

.00

469.44

469.44

Total 168750:

33.16-

.00

33.16-

1,062.25

02/17

02/21/2017

168751

1017 AMERIGAS - ST GEORGE

3060984384

1

10-63-280

.00

879.31

879.31

02/17

02/21/2017

168751

1017 AMERIGAS - ST GEORGE

3061038755

1

10-63-280

.00

135.93

135.93

02/17

02/21/2017

168751

1017 AMERIGAS - ST GEORGE

3061227443

1

10-63-280

.00

711.45

711.45

Total 168751:

.00

1,726.69

02/17

02/21/2017

168752

2430 ANDERSON HERITAGE ELEC. I

14047

1

10-65-250

.00

190.00

190.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168752

2430 ANDERSON HERITAGE ELEC. I

14048

1

52-40-610

.00

97.50

97.50

Total 168752: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168753

12158 APRILLYNN LEBARON

021517

1

10-57-610

Total 168753: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00

287.50 69.75

.00 168754

13820 AQUA PERFECT

52826

1

10-57-610

2

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

.00

69.75 69.75

128.00

128.00

27 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168754:

.00

128.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168755

12319 AUTO ZONE

2230924011

1

10-66-480

.00

388.99

388.99

02/17

02/21/2017

168755

12319 AUTO ZONE

2230928697

1

10-66-480

.00

15.75

15.75

Total 168755: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168756

14365 BATTLE BORN MEDIA LLC

M17-1093

1

10-48-220

Total 168756: 02/17

02/21/2017

15604 BERKLEY RISK ADMINISTRATO

QNRVARP17

1

12-87-610

Total 168757: 02/17

02/21/2017

02/21/2017

168758

14425 BG SOUTHERN NEVADA

PI0018599

1

10-66-250

02/21/2017

168759

13453 BILL A BERRETT, P.C.

020717

1

10-51-310

02/21/2017

1,222.00

.00

.00

168760

15607 BRAD SCHUPBACH

020617

1

17-34-405

.00

167.08

15614 BRETT PETERSON

021417

1

10-23200

Total 168761:

.00

167.08 167.08

150.00

150.00 150.00

50.00

.00 168761

1,222.00 1,222.00

.00

Total 168760: 02/17

.00

160.00 160.00

.00

Total 168759: 02/17

160.00

.00

Total 168758: 02/17

.00

404.74

.00 168757

50.00 50.00

500.00

.00

500.00 500.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168762

9529 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS

JAN 17

1

10-66-250

.00

677.13

677.13

02/17

02/21/2017

168762

9529 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS

JAN 17

2

10-66-480

.00

23.89

23.89

02/17

02/21/2017

168762

9529 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS

JAN 17

3

10-63-610

.00

19.19

19.19

02/17

02/21/2017

168762

9529 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS

JAN 17

4

52-40-250

.00

324.88

324.88

Total 168762:

3

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

.00

1,045.09

28 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

02/17

02/21/2017

168763

4755 CASELLE INC.

78299

1

52-40-310

.00

35.00

35.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168763

4755 CASELLE INC.

78299

2

10-46-310

.00

402.08

402.08

02/17

02/21/2017

168763

4755 CASELLE INC.

78299

3

83-81-610

.00

244.12

244.12

02/17

02/21/2017

168763

4755 CASELLE INC.

78299

4

83-82-610

.00

244.12

244.12

02/17

02/21/2017

168763

4755 CASELLE INC.

78299

5

52-40-310

.00

545.68

545.68

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168763: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168764

14492 CENTURYLINK

R020102014

1

10-47-310

Total 168764:

.00

1,471.00 3,880.50

.00

3,880.50 3,880.50

02/17

02/21/2017

168765

15608 CHATEAU INTERIORS & DESIG

020717

1

10-32-100

.00

35.00

35.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168765

15608 CHATEAU INTERIORS & DESIG

021317

1

10-32-100

.00

35.00

35.00

Total 168765: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168766

10598 CITY SHOPPES EMBROIDERY

83122

1

10-54-240

Total 168766: 02/17

02/21/2017

14074 CLARK COUNTY DEPT- AIR QU

024033

1

52-40-310

Total 168767: 02/17

02/21/2017

02/21/2017

168768

15618 CLAUDINE NICHOLS

021717

1

10-34-400

02/21/2017

168769

1645 COLORLAND SALES & SERVIC

45910

1

10-66-250

02/21/2017

1,863.80

.00

.00

168770

1634 CONNIE MORTENSEN

2016-005

1

10-66-610

.00

50.00

12005 COYOTE CARPET CLEANING

03581

1

10-63-310

.00

50.00 50.00

131.60

131.60 131.60

50.00

.00 168771

1,863.80 1,863.80

.00

Total 168770: 02/17

.00

59.00 59.00

.00

Total 168769: 02/17

59.00

.00

Total 168768: 02/17

.00

70.00

.00 168767

4

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

50.00 50.00

200.00

200.00

29 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168771: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168772

15619 DANIEL FELIX

022117

1

52-40-610

Total 168772: 02/17

02/21/2017

15603 ED HUTCHINS

020217

1

10-23200

Total 168773: 02/17

02/21/2017

02/21/2017

73.00

.00

168774

15086 ESPERANZA MENDOZA

020617

1

17-34-405

.00

1,280.00

13904 FIRETRUCKS UNLIMITED

S 10512

1

10-66-250

Total 168775:

.00

1,280.00 1,280.00

50.00

.00 168775

73.00 73.00

.00

Total 168774: 02/17

.00

200.00

.00 168773

50.00 50.00

500.00

.00

500.00 500.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168776

10723 FORSGREN ASSOCIATES INC.

10944

1

10-73-310

.00

300.00

300.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168776

10723 FORSGREN ASSOCIATES INC.

10945

1

25-85-757

.00

1,445.00

1,445.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168776

10723 FORSGREN ASSOCIATES INC.

10946

1

12-87-740

.00

2,880.00

2,880.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168776

10723 FORSGREN ASSOCIATES INC.

10949

1

12-87-740

.00

5,524.90

5,524.90

Total 168776: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168777

14274 FRESHAIRE/AIREMASTER

72797

1

10-81-610

Total 168777: 02/17

02/21/2017

2251 GALLS, LLC

006838030

1

10-54-610

Total 168778: 02/17

02/21/2017

02/21/2017

70.00

.00

168779

13054 GENO WITHELDER

022017

1

10-41-290

.00

43.90

181 GINA MENDEZ

021417

1

10-22530

.00

43.90 43.90

40.00

.00 168780

70.00 70.00

.00

Total 168779: 02/17

.00

10,149.90

.00 168778

5

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

40.00 40.00

54.00

54.00

30 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168780:

.00

54.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168781

9347 HARTWELL FAMILY PRACTICE

170209

1

10-54-320

.00

450.00

450.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168781

9347 HARTWELL FAMILY PRACTICE

THOJU000 2

1

10-55-620

.00

150.00

150.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168781

9347 HARTWELL FAMILY PRACTICE

TKARE000 2

1

10-55-620

.00

285.00

285.00

Total 168781: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168782

2427 HELENA CHEMICAL COMPANY

63745544

1

52-40-610

Total 168782:

.00

885.00 510.00

.00

510.00 510.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168783

2452 HIGH DESERT SUPPLY

IN00169679

1

10-66-250

.00

155.91

155.91

02/17

02/21/2017

168783

2452 HIGH DESERT SUPPLY

IN00169780

1

10-66-250

.00

104.94

104.94

Total 168783:

.00

260.85

02/17

02/21/2017

168784

13093 HONNEN EQUIPMENT

819344

1

10-66-250

.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168784

13093 HONNEN EQUIPMENT

825662

1

10-66-250

.00

514.20

514.20

02/17

02/21/2017

168784

13093 HONNEN EQUIPMENT

826236

1

10-66-250

.00

57.51

57.51

02/17

02/21/2017

168784

13093 HONNEN EQUIPMENT

826237

1

10-66-250

.00

25.85

25.85

Total 168784: 02/17

02/21/2017

9774 IAFC

62315 RR

1

10-57-230

Total 168785: 02/17

02/21/2017

02/21/2017

168786

8868 IAN DOUGLAS

020817

1

10-54-230

02/21/2017

279.00

.00

168787

14590 IAN MCOMIE

020617

1

10-48-620

.00

39.00

9482 ICC, INC

1000756325

1

10-61-230

.00

39.00 39.00

30.00

.00 168788

279.00 279.00

.00

Total 168787: 02/17

.00

41.32-

556.24

.00

Total 168786: 02/17

41.32-

.00 168785

6

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

30.00 30.00

200.00

200.00

31 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168788: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168789

2657 INTERSTATE BATTERY SO. UT

490081132

1

10-66-250

Total 168789: 02/17

02/21/2017

10132 INT'L ACADEMY OF EMER DISP

020917

1

10-56-230

Total 168790: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00

200.00 653.85

.00 168790

.00

14040 IRON MOUNTAIN CLEANERS

441564

1

10-54-620

Total 168791:

.00

653.85 653.85

200.00

.00 168791

200.00 200.00

39.03

.00

39.03 39.03

02/17

02/21/2017

168792

15504 ITSAVVY LLC

00930758

1

10-47-240

.00

26.35

02/17

02/21/2017

168792

15504 ITSAVVY LLC

00930900

1

25-85-240

.00

49.45

49.45

02/17

02/21/2017

168792

15504 ITSAVVY LLC

00931611

1

10-56-610

.00

963.49

963.49

Total 168792:

.00

26.35

1,039.29

02/17

02/21/2017

168793

13293 JAMES E. GUESMAN

021317

1

10-51-310

.00

225.00

225.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168793

13293 JAMES E. GUESMAN

021417

1

10-51-310

.00

275.00

275.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168793

13293 JAMES E. GUESMAN

21317

1

10-51-310

.00

225.00

225.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168793

13293 JAMES E. GUESMAN

2132017

1

10-51-310

.00

175.00

175.00

Total 168793: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168794

2850 JOHN'S DIESEL & AUTO REPAI

124

1

10-66-250

Total 168794: 02/17

02/21/2017

15617 JOSE GUILLEN

021717

1

25-85-653

Total 168795: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00

900.00 85.00

.00 168795

.00

12505 JOY EASTWOOD

022017

1

10-43-290

.00

85.00 85.00

3,423.75

.00 168796

7

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

3,423.75 3,423.75

40.00

40.00

32 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168796: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168797

15610 JUAN SANCHEZ

021317

1

10-23200

Total 168797:

.00

40.00 405.00

.00

405.00 405.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168798

10984 KOKOPELLI LANDSCAPING

89211

1

10-76-610

.00

1,550.00

1,550.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168798

10984 KOKOPELLI LANDSCAPING

89212

1

10-76-610

.00

1,490.00

1,490.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168798

10984 KOKOPELLI LANDSCAPING

89227

1

10-76-610

.00

358.85

358.85

Total 168798:

.00

3,398.85

02/17

02/21/2017

168799

3230 L.N. CURTIS & SONS

INV30238

1

10-57-250

.00

984.08

984.08

02/17

02/21/2017

168799

3230 L.N. CURTIS & SONS

INV30832

1

10-57-250

.00

1,207.46

1,207.46

Total 168799: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168800

13737 LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES

4008593

1

10-54-310

Total 168800:

.00

2,191.54 57.58

.00

57.58 57.58

02/17

02/21/2017

168801

9979 LARRY LEMIEUX

022017

1

12-87-310

.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168801

9979 LARRY LEMIEUX

022017

2

12-87-695

.00

168.82-

168.82-

02/17

02/21/2017

168801

9979 LARRY LEMIEUX

022017

3

12-87-610

.00

28.00-

28.00-

02/17

02/21/2017

168801

9979 LARRY LEMIEUX

022017 WC

1

12-87-610

.00

50.92-

50.92-

Total 168801: 02/17

02/21/2017

10158 LAS VEGAS METRO POLICE DE

90209161

1

10-54-310

Total 168802: 02/17

02/21/2017

02/21/2017

.00

168803

10236 LEGACY CONSTRUCTION, INC

7665

1

52-40-620

.00

393.00

9516 LIFE ASSIST INC.

782865

1

10-57-615

.00

393.00 393.00

12,191.98

.00 168804

2,127.30

1,879.56

.00

Total 168803: 02/17

2,127.30

.00 168802

8

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

12,191.98 12,191.98

1,995.17

1,995.17

33 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168804:

.00

1,995.17

02/17

02/21/2017

168805

5318 LIGHTHOUSE INC., THE

0316093

1

10-66-250

.00

67.95

67.95

02/17

02/21/2017

168805

5318 LIGHTHOUSE INC., THE

0316876

1

10-66-250

.00

316.00

316.00

Total 168805: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168806

747 LINCOLN CO. POWER DISTRIC

139701 JAN1

1

10-54-281

Total 168806: 02/17

02/21/2017

8090 LINCOLN COM. POOL EQUIPME

SI308306

1

17-80-610

Total 168807: 02/17

02/21/2017

02/21/2017

24.10

.00

168808

14624 LISA M BRAMLAGE

021217

1

10-54-310

.00

455.38

15568 M POWER USA

013117

1

10-54-230

Total 168809:

.00

455.38 455.38

100.00

.00 168809

24.10 24.10

.00

Total 168808: 02/17

.00

383.95

.00 168807

100.00 100.00

1,000.00

.00

1,000.00 1,000.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168810

14062 M2COMSYS

T9195

1

10-44-310

.00

214.28

214.28

02/17

02/21/2017

168810

14062 M2COMSYS

T9208

1

10-61-310

.00

87.89

87.89

Total 168810:

9

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

.00

302.17

02/17

02/21/2017

168811

3276 CENTRAL MONITORING STATI

FEB 17

1

10-81-310

.00

21.95

21.95

02/17

02/21/2017

168811

3276 CENTRAL MONITORING STATI

FEB 17

2

10-55-610

.00

21.95

21.95

02/17

02/21/2017

168811

3276 CENTRAL MONITORING STATI

FEB 17

3

10-57-310

.00

38.90

38.90

02/17

02/21/2017

168811

3276 CENTRAL MONITORING STATI

FEB 17

4

10-63-310

.00

37.90

37.90

02/17

02/21/2017

168811

3276 CENTRAL MONITORING STATI

FEB 17

5

10-66-610

.00

16.95

16.95

02/17

02/21/2017

168811

3276 CENTRAL MONITORING STATI

FEB 17

6

10-65-610

.00

21.95

21.95

02/17

02/21/2017

168811

3276 CENTRAL MONITORING STATI

FEB 17

7

10-70-610

.00

18.95

18.95

02/17

02/21/2017

168811

3276 CENTRAL MONITORING STATI

FEB 17

8

10-76-310

.00

18.95

18.95

02/17

02/21/2017

168811

3276 CENTRAL MONITORING STATI

FEB 17

9

10-81-310

.00

59.85

59.85

02/17

02/21/2017

168811

3276 CENTRAL MONITORING STATI

FEB 17

10

10-82-620

.00

21.95

21.95

34 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

02/17

02/21/2017

168811

3276 CENTRAL MONITORING STATI

FEB 17

11

16-71-290

.00

38.90

38.90

02/17

02/21/2017

168811

3276 CENTRAL MONITORING STATI

FEB 17

12

52-40-310

.00

16.95

16.95

02/17

02/21/2017

168811

3276 CENTRAL MONITORING STATI

FEB 17

13

10-38-701

.00

21.95

21.95

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168811: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168812

12390 MATCO TOOLS

20095247

1

10-66-610

Total 168812: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00

357.10 32.03

.00 168813

3313 MCCANDLESS INTERNATIONAL

X100588090:

1

10-66-250

Total 168813:

.00

32.03 32.03

337.24

.00

337.24 337.24

02/17

02/21/2017

168814

11236 MEADOW GOLD DAIRIES

59607638

1

16-71-480

.00

292.26

292.26

02/17

02/21/2017

168814

11236 MEADOW GOLD DAIRIES

59607713

1

16-71-480

.00

234.52

234.52

Total 168814:

.00

526.78

02/17

02/21/2017

168815

9980 MEGA-PRO INTERNATIONAL

24854

1

17-80-610

.00

1,416.75

1,416.75

02/17

02/21/2017

168815

9980 MEGA-PRO INTERNATIONAL

25036

1

17-80-610

.00

994.75

994.75

Total 168815: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168816

10764 MESA VIEW REGIONAL HOSPIT

331-03

1

10-57-320

Total 168816:

10

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

.00

2,411.50 359.46

.00

359.46 359.46

02/17

02/21/2017

168817

3344 MESQUITE CHAMBER OF COM

E2296

1

10-43-610

.00

30.00

30.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168817

3344 MESQUITE CHAMBER OF COM

E2296

2

10-41-620

.00

30.00

30.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168817

3344 MESQUITE CHAMBER OF COM

E2296

3

10-81-230

.00

15.00

15.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168817

3344 MESQUITE CHAMBER OF COM

E2296

4

10-44-230

.00

15.00

15.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168817

3344 MESQUITE CHAMBER OF COM

E2296

5

10-50-230

.00

15.00

15.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168817

3344 MESQUITE CHAMBER OF COM

E2296

6

10-46-240

.00

30.00

30.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168817

3344 MESQUITE CHAMBER OF COM

E2296

7

10-61-230

.00

15.00

15.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168817

3344 MESQUITE CHAMBER OF COM

E2296

8

10-54-240

.00

60.00

60.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168817

3344 MESQUITE CHAMBER OF COM

E2296

9

10-54-240

.00

15.00

15.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168817

3344 MESQUITE CHAMBER OF COM

E2296

10

10-60-610

.00

30.00

30.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168817

3344 MESQUITE CHAMBER OF COM

E2296

11

10-47-240

.00

15.00

15.00

35 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

02/17

02/21/2017

168817

3344 MESQUITE CHAMBER OF COM

E2296

12

10-48-240

.00

15.00

15.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168817

3344 MESQUITE CHAMBER OF COM

E2296

13

10-57-210

.00

15.00

15.00

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168817: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168818

11650 MESQUITE FORD

383154

1

10-66-250

Total 168818:

.00

300.00 116.96

.00

116.96 116.96

02/17

02/21/2017

168819

3500 MESQUITE LUMBER & SUPPLY

JAN 17

1

10-38-900

.00

100.00-

02/17

02/21/2017

168819

3500 MESQUITE LUMBER & SUPPLY

JAN 17

2

10-57-610

.00

28.57

28.57

02/17

02/21/2017

168819

3500 MESQUITE LUMBER & SUPPLY

JAN 17

3

10-63-610

.00

517.68

517.68

02/17

02/21/2017

168819

3500 MESQUITE LUMBER & SUPPLY

JAN 17

4

10-65-250

.00

41.98

41.98

02/17

02/21/2017

168819

3500 MESQUITE LUMBER & SUPPLY

JAN 17

5

10-65-610

.00

41.00

41.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168819

3500 MESQUITE LUMBER & SUPPLY

JAN 17

6

10-70-610

.00

117.87

117.87

02/17

02/21/2017

168819

3500 MESQUITE LUMBER & SUPPLY

JAN 17

7

10-76-610

.00

575.14

575.14

02/17

02/21/2017

168819

3500 MESQUITE LUMBER & SUPPLY

JAN 17

8

10-81-250

.00

18.98

18.98

02/17

02/21/2017

168819

3500 MESQUITE LUMBER & SUPPLY

JAN 17

9

10-81-610

.00

184.29

184.29

Total 168819: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168820

15220 MESQUITE RESERVE LLC

020917

1

90-26100

Total 168820: 02/17

02/21/2017

3457 MESQUITE VETERINARY CLINI

134176

1

10-70-310

Total 168821: 02/17

02/21/2017

02/21/2017

66,790.00

.00

168822

15616 MESQUITE WORKS

021717

1

25-85-653

.00

627.64

13651 MIRIAM C FLORES

020817

1

10-51-310

Total 168823:

.00

627.64 627.64

4,313.94

.00 168823

66,790.00 66,790.00

.00

Total 168822: 02/17

.00

100.00-

1,425.51

.00 168821

11

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

4,313.94 4,313.94

300.00

.00

300.00 300.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168824

3580 MORCON INDUSTRIAL SPECIA

0015648-IN

1

10-63-610

.00

636.85

636.85

02/17

02/21/2017

168824

3580 MORCON INDUSTRIAL SPECIA

0015658-IN

1

10-63-610

.00

36.00

36.00

36 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

02/17

02/21/2017

168824

3580 MORCON INDUSTRIAL SPECIA

0015662-IN

1

10-63-610

.00

227.35

02/17

02/21/2017

168824

3580 MORCON INDUSTRIAL SPECIA

0015663-IN

1

10-81-250

.00

31.71

31.71

02/17

02/21/2017

168824

3580 MORCON INDUSTRIAL SPECIA

0015666-IN

1

10-63-610

.00

160.92

160.92

02/17

02/21/2017

168824

3580 MORCON INDUSTRIAL SPECIA

0015687-IN

1

52-40-610

.00

228.71

228.71

02/17

02/21/2017

168824

3580 MORCON INDUSTRIAL SPECIA

0015710-IN

1

10-66-610

.00

48.77

48.77

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168824:

.00

227.35

1,370.31

02/17

02/21/2017

168825

3653 MOUNT OLYMPUS WATERS, IN

10216681 02

1

10-51-610

.00

21.70

21.70

02/17

02/21/2017

168825

3653 MOUNT OLYMPUS WATERS, IN

10217943 02

1

10-55-240

.00

30.47

30.47

02/17

02/21/2017

168825

3653 MOUNT OLYMPUS WATERS, IN

10219318 02

1

10-54-240

.00

69.65

69.65

02/17

02/21/2017

168825

3653 MOUNT OLYMPUS WATERS, IN

10219327 02

1

10-49-240

.00

106.35

106.35

02/17

02/21/2017

168825

3653 MOUNT OLYMPUS WATERS, IN

10219327 02

2

10-41-610

.00

66.17

66.17

02/17

02/21/2017

168825

3653 MOUNT OLYMPUS WATERS, IN

10219327 02

3

12-87-610

.00

9.16

9.16

Total 168825: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168826

14058 MTM CLEANING SERVICE

254

1

10-63-310

Total 168826: 02/17

02/21/2017

15044 NEVADA AIRPORTS ASSOCIATI

021617

1

12-87-210

Total 168827: 02/17

02/21/2017

02/21/2017

1,010.00

.00

168828

15613 NEVADA DONOR NETWORK IN

1018

1

10-54-230

.00

50.00

5050 NV DEPT OF EMPLOYMENT SE

5623761

1

17-80-130

Total 168829:

.00

50.00 50.00

100.00

.00 168829

1,010.00 1,010.00

.00

Total 168828: 02/17

.00

303.50

.00 168827

12

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

100.00 100.00

94.00

.00

94.00 94.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168830

3911 NV. PUBLIC AGENCY INS. POO

4684

1

10-49-510

.00

2,000.00

2,000.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168830

3911 NV. PUBLIC AGENCY INS. POO

4685

1

10-49-510

.00

2,000.00

2,000.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168830

3911 NV. PUBLIC AGENCY INS. POO

4686

1

10-49-510

.00

1,600.50

1,600.50

02/17

02/21/2017

168830

3911 NV. PUBLIC AGENCY INS. POO

4687

1

10-49-510

.00

2,000.00

2,000.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168830

3911 NV. PUBLIC AGENCY INS. POO

4688

1

10-49-510

.00

2,000.00

2,000.00

37 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168830: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168831

14468 ONESOURCE WATER LLC

CNIV268963

1

10-81-610

Total 168831: 02/17

02/21/2017

15615 POINTS OF LIGHT FOUNDATIO

020817

1

10-54-610

Total 168832: 02/17

02/21/2017

02/21/2017

168833

10243 PRECISION AGGREGATE PRO

41650

1

10-76-610

02/21/2017

168834

15527 PREMIER COLUMBARIA LLC

20170130-03

1

45-40-800

02/21/2017

168835

8598 RMT EQUIPMENT

T51474

1

10-66-250

02/21/2017

168836

15612 ROBERT SPENCER

012517

1

10-23200

02/21/2017

382.20

.00

.00

.00

168837

10148 RUTH U KOLHOSS

021517

1

10-51-310

.00

17,448.00

15430 SATELLITE TRACKING OF PEO

STPINV0003

1

15-51-500

Total 168838:

.00

17,448.00 17,448.00

92.53

92.53 92.53

3,115.00

3,115.00 3,115.00

500.00

.00 168838

382.20 382.20

.00

Total 168837: 02/17

.00

103.75 103.75

.00

Total 168836: 02/17

103.75

.00

Total 168835: 02/17

.00

38.77 38.77

.00

Total 168834: 02/17

38.77

.00

Total 168833: 02/17

.00

9,600.50

.00 168832

13

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

500.00 500.00

66.50

.00

66.50 66.50

02/17

02/21/2017

168839

12196 SHERWIN- WILLIAMS STORE 85 0927-3

1

10-81-610

.00

39.48

39.48

02/17

02/21/2017

168839

12196 SHERWIN- WILLIAMS STORE 85 0928-1

1

10-81-610

.00

13.53

13.53

02/17

02/21/2017

168839

12196 SHERWIN- WILLIAMS STORE 85 09687

1

10-81-610

.00

99.00

99.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168839

12196 SHERWIN- WILLIAMS STORE 85 0968-7

1

10-57-250

.00

99.00

99.00

38 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

02/17

02/21/2017

168839

12196 SHERWIN- WILLIAMS STORE 85 7014-9

1

10-81-610

.00

71.44

71.44

02/17

02/21/2017

168839

12196 SHERWIN- WILLIAMS STORE 85 7042-0

1

17-80-610

.00

256.14

256.14

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168839: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168840

14271 SHI INTERNATIONAL CORP

B06080774

1

10-46-740

Total 168840: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00

578.59 8,336.00

.00 168841

15611 SHRED-IT USA LLC

8121724502

1

10-44-240

Total 168841:

.00

8,336.00 8,336.00

469.80

.00

469.80 469.80

02/17

02/21/2017

168842

13011 SILVERSTATE ANALYTICAL LA

LV204228

1

52-40-310

.00

453.00

453.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168842

13011 SILVERSTATE ANALYTICAL LA

LV204229

1

52-40-310

.00

1,000.00

1,000.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168842

13011 SILVERSTATE ANALYTICAL LA

LV204427

1

52-40-310

.00

453.00

453.00

Total 168842: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168843

10743 SKM, INC.

6483

1

52-40-310

Total 168843: 02/17

02/21/2017

13068 SOUTHWEST PLUMBING SUPP

S2790857.00

1

10-63-610

Total 168844: 02/17

02/21/2017

02/21/2017

2,311.35

.00

168845

9500 SPILLMAN TECHNOLOGIES, IN

33372

1

10-54-740

.00

39.19

10558 ST. OF NV. PUBLIC EMP. BENE

FEB 17

1

10-49-130

Total 168846:

.00

39.19 39.19

8,004.00

.00 168846

2,311.35 2,311.35

.00

Total 168845: 02/17

.00

1,906.00

.00 168844

14

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

8,004.00 8,004.00

836.63

.00

836.63 836.63

02/17

02/21/2017

168847

8989 STAPLES ADVANTAGE

3327963299

1

17-80-485

.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168847

8989 STAPLES ADVANTAGE

3329441827

1

17-80-485

.00

128.52 81.12-

128.52 81.12-

02/17

02/21/2017

168847

8989 STAPLES ADVANTAGE

3329441828

1

17-80-485

.00

128.52-

128.52-

02/17

02/21/2017

168847

8989 STAPLES ADVANTAGE

3329531653

1

10-81-240

.00

33.45-

33.45-

39 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

02/17

02/21/2017

168847

8989 STAPLES ADVANTAGE

3329857655

1

10-54-240

.00

1,153.40

1,153.40

02/17

02/21/2017

168847

8989 STAPLES ADVANTAGE

3329857656

1

10-54-240

.00

8.44

8.44

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168847:

.00

1,047.27

02/17

02/21/2017

168848

3922 STATE OF NEVADA

42491

1

10-48-310

.00

217.50

217.50

02/17

02/21/2017

168848

3922 STATE OF NEVADA

42491

2

90-26129

.00

326.25

326.25

Total 168848: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168849

3917 STATE OF NEVADA-ENVIR.PRO

NV-947 FY16

1

52-40-230

Total 168849: 02/17

02/21/2017

9553 STEPHEN WADE AUTO CENTE

020317

1

14-54-740

Total 168850: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00

543.75 30.00

.00 168850

.00

5140 STERLING CODIFIERS, INC.

19032

1

10-44-310

Total 168851:

.00

30.00 30.00

21,349.00

.00 168851

21,349.00 21,349.00

2,377.00

.00

2,377.00 2,377.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168852

14735 STEVEN E. ANDERSON, DC

102503

1

52-40-610

.00

80.00

80.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168852

14735 STEVEN E. ANDERSON, DC

102503

2

10-65-610

.00

80.00

80.00

Total 168852: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168853

13211 SYSCO LAS VEGAS, INC

117084871

1

16-71-480

Total 168853: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00

160.00 1,611.23

.00 168854

14215 TERRIE ELAINE MCARTHUR

020717

1

17-80-610

Total 168854:

15

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

.00

1,611.23 1,611.23

267.00

.00

267.00 267.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168855

14632 TERRY L HUTCHINSON LTD

020217

1

10-51-310

.00

100.00

100.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168855

14632 TERRY L HUTCHINSON LTD

021317

1

10-51-310

.00

300.00

300.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168855

14632 TERRY L HUTCHINSON LTD

21317

1

10-51-310

.00

400.00

400.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168855

14632 TERRY L HUTCHINSON LTD

2132017

1

10-51-310

.00

300.00

300.00

40 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168855:

.00

1,100.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168856

5290 THATCHER COMPANY

5026774

1

52-40-480

.00

1,843.52

1,843.52

02/17

02/21/2017

168856

5290 THATCHER COMPANY

5026794

1

10-81-610

.00

861.00

861.00

Total 168856:

.00

2,704.52

02/17

02/21/2017

168857

11403 TIRE DISTRIBUTION SYS., INC

702-47143

1

10-66-480

.00

111.67

111.67

02/17

02/21/2017

168857

11403 TIRE DISTRIBUTION SYS., INC

702-47146

1

10-66-480

.00

105.00

105.00

Total 168857:

.00

216.67

02/17

02/21/2017

168858

13704 TONY TERRY, LTD

020617

1

10-51-310

.00

190.00

190.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168858

13704 TONY TERRY, LTD

021317

1

10-51-310

.00

220.00

220.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168858

13704 TONY TERRY, LTD

21317

1

10-51-310

.00

310.00

310.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168858

13704 TONY TERRY, LTD

2132017

1

10-51-310

.00

280.00

280.00

Total 168858: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168859

3499 TRADE WEST CONSTRUCTION

3219

1

10-65-480

Total 168859: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00

1,000.00 9,850.00

.00 168860

14456 TRANSUNION RISK AND ALTER

37881 JAN 1

1

10-54-310

Total 168860:

.00

9,850.00 9,850.00

46.10

.00

46.10 46.10

02/17

02/21/2017

168861

8770 U.S. FOODSERVICE - L.V. DIV.

3124098

1

10-55-620

.00

588.35

588.35

02/17

02/21/2017

168861

8770 U.S. FOODSERVICE - L.V. DIV.

3251946

1

10-55-620

.00

504.27

504.27

02/17

02/21/2017

168861

8770 U.S. FOODSERVICE - L.V. DIV.

3276300

1

16-71-480

.00

239.57

239.57

02/17

02/21/2017

168861

8770 U.S. FOODSERVICE - L.V. DIV.

3276301

1

16-71-480

.00

1,359.17

1,359.17

Total 168861:

16

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

.00

2,691.36

02/17

02/21/2017

168862

5616 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE

00009E1629

1

10-49-240

.00

25.80

25.80

02/17

02/21/2017

168862

5616 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE

00009E1629

2

16-71-240

.00

23.37

23.37

41 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168862: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168863

15506 VEGAS ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO

4094-628882

1

10-65-250

Total 168863:

.00

49.17 63.24

.00

63.24 63.24

02/17

02/21/2017

168864

9528 VERIZON WIRELESS

9778773500

1

10-57-290

.00

157.09

157.09

02/17

02/21/2017

168864

9528 VERIZON WIRELESS

9778773500

2

10-47-290

.00

29.27

29.27

02/17

02/21/2017

168864

9528 VERIZON WIRELESS

9778773500

3

10-54-290

.00

50.75

50.75

02/17

02/21/2017

168864

9528 VERIZON WIRELESS

9778773500

4

10-54-310

.00

29.27

29.27

Total 168864: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168865

8748 VIRGIN VALLEY VETERINARY H 232191

1

10-70-310

Total 168865: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00

266.38 56.59

.00 168866

14218 WARREN B HARDY II

1702

1

10-41-310

Total 168866:

17

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

.00

56.59 56.59

2,500.00

.00

2,500.00 2,500.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 A B

1

10-41-230

.00

20.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 A B

2

10-57-610

.00

20.00

20.00 20.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 AB

1

10-82-610

.00

226.12

226.12

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 AB

2

10-43-230

.00

300.00

300.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

1

52-40-620

.00

1,425.92-

1,425.92-

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

2

10-63-610

.00

18.25

18.25

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

3

10-63-610

.00

74.26

74.26

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

4

10-66-610

.00

26.41

26.41

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

5

10-63-610

.00

316.70

316.70

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

6

10-63-610

.00

49.47

49.47

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

7

10-63-610

.00

21.16

21.16

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

8

10-63-610

.00

36.70

36.70

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

9

10-66-250

.00

77.99

77.99

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

10

10-63-610

.00

106.92

106.92

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

11

10-63-610

.00

446.95

446.95

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

12

10-63-610

.00

212.70

212.70

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

13

10-66-610

.00

160.52

160.52

42 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

14

10-63-610

.00

113.24

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

15

10-63-610

.00

85.00

85.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

16

52-40-610

.00

1,567.00

1,567.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

17

10-63-610

.00

105.72

105.72

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 BT

18

10-63-610

.00

416.54

416.54

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 DM

1

10-47-310

.00

49.95

49.95

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 DM

2

10-43-240

.00

7.00

7.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 GM

1

10-54-240

.00

292.00

292.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 KC

1

10-57-210

.00

190.00

190.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 RR

1

10-57-230

.00

179.00

179.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 RR

2

10-57-610

.00

16.09

16.09

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 RR

3

10-57-615

.00

164.65

164.65

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 RR

4

10-57-250

.00

102.40

102.40

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 RR

5

10-57-240

.00

347.95

347.95

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 RS

1

10-50-210

.00

37.15

37.15

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 RS

2

10-50-230

.00

35.09

35.09

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 RS

3

10-50-310

.00

300.00

300.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 ST

1

90-26118

.00

2,347.33

2,347.33

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 ST

2

10-54-230

.00

108.94

108.94

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 TT

1

90-26118

.00

4,211.53

4,211.53

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 TT

2

10-54-610

.00

512.17

512.17

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 TT

3

10-54-230

.00

161.22

161.22

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 TT

4

90-26118

.00

505.95

505.95

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 TT

5

10-56-610

.00

196.76

196.76

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 TT

6

10-54-240

.00

19.99

19.99

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 TT

7

10-54-240

.00

202.52

202.52

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 TT

8

10-54-230

.00

156.76

156.76

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 TT

9

10-54-240

.00

249.00

249.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 TT

10

10-54-230

.00

391.80

391.80

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 TT

11

10-54-230

.00

1,035.80

1,035.80

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 TT

12

10-54-610

.00

1,151.40

1,151.40

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217 TT

13

10-54-610

.00

630.00

630.00

02/17

02/21/2017

168867

10077 WELLS FARGO

011217NM

1

10-81-250

.00

279.15

279.15

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168867: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168868

8841 WEST PAYMENT CENTER

835520668

1

10-50-210

18

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

.00

113.24

16,857.33 550.00

550.00

43 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda

Page:

Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017 GL

Check

Check

Vendor

Period

Issue Date

Number

Number

Payee

Invoice

Invoice

Invoice

Discount

Invoice

Check

Number

Sequence

GL Account

Taken

Amount

Amount

Total 168868: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168869

10896 WESTECH

61677

1

52-40-610

Total 168869: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00

550.00 308.61

.00 168870

11912 WYATT OLIVER

020717

1

10-54-230

Total 168870:

.00

308.61 308.61

63.01

.00

63.01 63.01

02/17

02/21/2017

168871

9901 XEROX CORPORATION

087941285

1

10-49-250

.00

349.12

349.12

02/17

02/21/2017

168871

9901 XEROX CORPORATION

087941285

2

10-49-250

.00

162.70

162.70

02/17

02/21/2017

168871

9901 XEROX CORPORATION

087941286

1

10-49-250

.00

326.83

326.83

02/17

02/21/2017

168871

9901 XEROX CORPORATION

087941286

2

10-49-250

.00

196.29

196.29

Total 168871: 02/17

02/21/2017

.00 168872

15525 XTREME STITCH & PRINT

INV-7748023

1

10-54-610

19

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

.00

1,034.94 127.46

127.46

Total 168872:

.00

127.46

Grand Totals:

.00

374,129.97

44 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE

Check Register - for City Council Agenda Check Issue Dates: 2/13/2017 - 2/26/2017

Page:

20

Feb 28, 2017 06:35AM

Dated: ______________________________________________________ Mayor: ______________________________________________________ City Council: ______________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ City Recorder: ______________________________________________________

Report Criteria: Report type: GL detail

45 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check

CITY OF MESQUITE PURCHASE ORDERS REQUIRING COUNCIL APPROVAL DATE OF COUNCIL MEETING: March 14, 2017

A. P.O's for Not Previously Budget-Approved Items...amounts exceed $5,000

For Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Current

Vendor

Description

Requested By:

Department

Remaining

G/L

Account

Po's to be

Original

Budget

Budget

Account #

Description

Approved

Budget

Balance

(Over)Under

B. P.O's for Budgeted Items6amounts exceed $25,000

For Fiscal Year 2016-2017

46

CITY OF MESQUITE NOTIFICATION OF BUDGET TRANSFERS DATE OF COUNCIL MEETING: March 14, 2017

TRANSFERS FROM: Fund

Account #

Account Description

TRANSFERS TO: Incr.

Fund

Account #

Account Description

NRS 354.5980005 Budget appropriations may be transferred between functions, funds or contingency accounts in the following manner is such a transfer does not increase the total appropriation for any fiscal year and is not in conflict with other statutory provisions: (a) The person designated to administer the budget for local government may transfer appropriations within any function. (1) The governing body is advised of the action at the next regular meeting and (2) The action is recorded in the official minutes of the meeting (c) Upon recommendation of the person designated to administer the budget, the governing body may authorize the transfer of appropriations between funds or from the contingency account, if: (1) The governing body announces the transfer of appropriations of a regularly scheduled meeting and sets forth the each amount to be transferred and the accounts, functions, programs and funds affected; (2) The governing body sets forth its reasons for the transfer; and (3) The action is recorded in the official minutes of the meeting.

Incr.

47

CITY OF MESQUITE NOTIFICATION OF BUDGET AMENDMENTS AND BUDGET AUGMENTS DATE OF COUNCIL MEETING: March 14, 2017

BUDGET AMENDMENTS FY2016-2017

Revenues Increase Fund

Amended Amounts

Expenditures Increase

Amended Amounts

Account #

Account Description

Incr.

Budget

Fund

Account #

Account Description

Incr.

Budget

Account #

Account Description

Incr.

Budget

Fund

Account #

Account Description

Incr.

Budget

Account #

Account Description

Incr.

Budget

Fund

Account #

Account Description

Incr.

Budget

Account #

Account Description

Incr.

Budget

Fund

Account #

Account Description

Incr.

Budget

Account #

Account Description

Incr.

Budget

Fund

Account #

Account Description

Incr.

Budget

DESCRIPTION:

Fund DESCRIPTION:

Fund DESCRIPTION:

Fund DESCRIPTION:

Fund DESCRIPTION:

BUDGET AUGMENTS FY2016-2017

Revenues Increase Fund

Account #

Account Description

Amended Amounts Incr.

Budget

Expenditures Increase Fund

Account #

Account Description

Amended Amounts Incr.

Budget

48

City Council Agenda Item 4 Submitted by: Jesselyn Bickley Submitting Department: Development Services Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: Consideration of Approval of a Liquor Catering License for Los Lupes, located at 312 W. Mesquite Blvd. - Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Recommendation: Approve Liquor Catering License for Special Event the evening of March 31, 2017. Petitioner: Jesselyn Bickley Is this a budgeted item? No Fiscal Impact: Revenue collected from Liquor License application fee Background: Los Lupes currently holds a liquor license with the City of Mesquite. They are requesting a liquor catering license to provide alcohol at a special event, Sonora Dinamita, on March 31, 2017 at Salon de Fiestas El Escondido, located at 780 Hafen Lane Unit B. Contract Bid Expires On:

Attachments:  Mesquite Municipal Code.pdf  LOS LUPES APP.pdf

49

Mesquite Municipal Code 2-4-28: SPECIAL EVENTS PERMITS: The city manager or his designee may authorize the issuance of a special events permit which includes the sale or serving of liquor pursuant to chapter 12 of this title. (Ord. 402, 7-8-2008, eff. 7-31-2008)

50

51

52

53

54

City Council Agenda Item 5 Submitted by: Dirk Marshall Submitting Department: Information Technology Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: Consideration of Approval of an agreement with SADA Systems, Inc. for Document Management Software. - Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Recommendation: Approval of the agreement with SADA Systems, Inc. for Document Management Software. Petitioner: Dirk Marshall, Information Technology Director Is this a budgeted item? Yes Fiscal Impact: Fiscal Year 16/17 = $8,800.00 Fiscal Year 17/18 = $16,160.00 Annual Estimate going beyond 17/18 = $15,660 Background: The Sire product we are currently using for Document Management was sold to another company and the product is no longer being updated and support for it is limited. Over the last 18 months we have reviewed different options for replacing Sire. We reviewed functionality such as ease of use, mobility, workflow, record retention rules, public access, searchability, audit trail and security among other functionality. We contacted other Cities to determine what solutions they were using and what concerns they had. Cost was another major factor we considered. The cost for the software is one cost but another cost to be considered is for data storage. The more documents we put into this system the more storage is needed. Due to the fact that our Google G Suite investment provides unlimited storage in Google Drive we determined that we should review options that could utilize that storage and eliminate the storage cost. During that review we found AODocs. We have watched AODocs improve their product for over a year and feel that it meets what we need for document management. As a cloud based product it also has the ability to integrate with other services for additional functionality that we can add in the future such as data encryption or digital signatures. This product gives us functionality we need now plus room to grow in the future at an annual cost that is 55 reasonable with minimal up front investment.

Contract Bid Expires On:

Attachments:  CityofMesquite-AODocs Ordering Document.pdf  AODocs Overview - City of Mesquite.pdf

56

SADA Systems, Inc. AODocs ORDERING DOCUMENT This AODocs Ordering Document (the “​Ordering Document​“) between SADA Systems, Inc. and Customer (as defined below) governs Customer’s access to and use of the Services, defined in the Terms of Service of Altirnao, Inc. for AODocs, available at ​http://www.aodocs.com/terms-of-service​.

Customer:​ City of Mesquite Corporate Address:​ 10 E. Mesquite Blvd. Mesquite, TX 89027 Entity:​ City State of Organization: Nevada Contact

Main Contact

Accounts Payable

Tech Contact / Admin

Dirk Marshall

Dodie Melendez

Dirk Marshall

Information Technology Manager

Accounts Payable

Information Technology Manager

Street

10 E. Mesquite Blvd

10 E Mesquite Blvd

10 E. Mesquite Blvd

City, State ZIP

Mesquite, NV 89027

Mesquite, NV 89027

Mesquite, NV 89027

Phone

702-346-5295

702-346-5295

702-346-5295

Email

[email protected]

[email protected] ov

[email protected]

Full Name Title

Customer agrees to purchase and SADA agrees to provide the following Google services to Customer in the indicated quantity and at the indicated pricing in U.S. Dollars:

Item

Quantity

Price

GA-AODocs-DM AODocs Document Management Annual subscription

180

$72.00

$12,960.00

GA-AODocs-AwesomeTable Annual subscription

180

$15.00

$2,700.00

GA-AODocs Migration Tool

1

$20,000.00

5.5

$1,600

GA-AODocs Professional Services -- Day rate

Total

$20,000.00 $8,800.00

Subtotal

$44,460.00

AODocs Migration Tool Discount

<$19,500>

TOTAL

$24,960.00

Initial Term of the Agreement: 16 months from signature date (16 months for the price of 12) ***Term and pricing valid only until March 27, 2017***

57

Payment Terms: Payment

Invoice Date

Amount

100% of Licenses

July 1, 2017

$16,160.00

100% of Services

Upon Signature

$8,800.00

TOTAL

$24,960.00

Invoices and Payment​: SADA will invoice Client for all amounts due under any executed Ordering Document or Statements of Work in accordance with the schedule set forth in such executed Statement of Work. Each invoice submitted to Client pursuant to this Agreement will be due and payable by Client within 30 days of receipt. Payment is accepted by check or ACH/EFT.

Bank Information Automated Clearing House (ACH) or Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) Wells Fargo Bank Swift Code: WFBIUS6 464 California St. San Francisco, CA 94104 Routing Number: ​121042882 Bank Account Name: SADA Systems, Inc. Bank Account Number: 7757670067

Remittance Address: SADA Systems, Inc 5250 Lankershim Blvd., Suite 620 North Hollywood, CA 91601 ATTN: Accounting

Domain(s): (where the products are to be provisioned) ● mesquitenv.gov Notices: Any notices under this Agreement will be directed, if to SADA, at: Annie Safoian, Chief Financial Officer SADA Systems, Inc. 5250 Lankershim Blvd., Suite 620 North Hollywood, CA 91601 Email: ​[email protected] Fax: 818-766-0090 and if to Customer, at the Main Contact above.

CUSTOMER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT HAS READ THIS ORDERING DOCUMENT AND THE CORRESPONDING TERMS OF SERVICE FOR ALTIRNAO, INC., AND UNDERSTANDS AND AGREES TO BE LEGALLY BOUND BY THEIR TERMS. IN WITNESS WHEREOF​, this Ordering Document has been executed by the parties through their duly authorized officers.

58

SADA Systems, Inc.

City of Mesquite, Nevada

___________________________________

___________________________________

Print name: _________________________

Print name: _________________________

Print title: ___________________________

Print title: ___________________________

Date: ______________________________

Date: ______________________________

59

Features In Google Drive UI 60

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Corporate ownership

Corporate ownership – all files are owned by a corporate Google account Folder integrity protection – prevent users from moving files out of a shared folder In AODocs, all files are owned by a corporate account 61

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Advanced permissions control File loss prevention – prevent users from deleting files or folders Secured sharing – prevent users from sharing files or folders

At folder level, administrators can prevent users from resharing files

Folder structure protection – prevent end users from creating, renaming, moving sub-folders

62

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Office file collaboration

Open, edit and save MS Office files directly from Google Drive

Open Microsoft Office files from Google Drive in one click

Lock files to prevent concurrent editing Use any version of Microsoft Office on Mac and Windows

63

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Breadcrumbs

Easily locate your document’s parent folder path in the Google Docs editor Easily navigate among your folders in Google Drive

Use breadcrumbs to locate your documents in Google Drive

64

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Search in folder

Focus the search on the current folder and its subfolders List all the files of the current folder and all its subfolders

AODocs search in folder in Google Drive interface

65

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Pushed folders

Automatically add an AODocs folder to the users’ My Drive

Pushing the AODocs library root folder to all users’ My Drive

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

66

Folder picker

Easily access your AODocs folders, just type a few characters and select the matching folder

Star your favorite folders to have them on top of the list

Folder picker (1) and “Add to favorites” button (2)

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

67

Workflow & Metadata in Drive

List your pending workflow tasks in Google Drive Perform workflow actions in Google Drive View and edit your documents’ metadata in Google Drive Workflow & Metadata in Google Drive

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

68

Features In AODocs UI 69

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Document metadata

Document metadata – tag your documents with any type of properties (strings, numbers, people, URLs, dates, value lists, …) Categories - define custom lists of values like countries, customer names, product names to enforce consistency in the metadata 70

Document metadata in AODocs

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Custom document views

Configure document views and reports by selecting columns, sort order, and filters

Embed document views in Google Sites or intranet pages Document views in AODocs

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

71

Advanced search

Combine multiple search criteria like keywords, metadata values, date ranges and numerical values

Search in document title, metadata, and in the content of attached files

72

Advanced search (keyword, filter, browse by, metadata) in AODocs

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Version control

Set custom version names and descriptions

Control when new versions are created, even with Google Docs

Document versions in AODocs 73

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Check in / Check out

The check-out operations allows a user to get an exclusive lock on a document. Other users cannot make any changes to the document until the lock is released.

Check in / check out option

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

When a document is checked in, a new version of the document is 74 automatically created.

Workflow

Define workflows in a few clicks with fully configurable steps and approval paths Customize notification emails Automate document permissions based on workflow steps Integrate with other applications via webhooks and custom scripts Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Workflow actions in AODocs

75

Audit log

Record all user and administrator activities in your AODocs folder Search audit log events by event type, user, object id and date range

76

AODocs audit log

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

External sharing control

Fine-grained whitelist of external users to whom documents can be shared

Whitelist can contain individual users, Google Groups or entire domains Add external users in a whitelist to share files

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

77

File recovery

Set a custom retention time for each folder Configurable trash retention time

Restore all files or selected deleted ones directly in Google Drive

78

Restore deleted files Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Use Cases 79

Migrate SharePoint and other legacy DMS to AODocs Customer

Customer challenges

Chief Information Officer

Costly on premises infrastructure (servers, backup, VPN, software, administration)

Head of IT Director of IT Head of Infrastructure

Legacy products are approaching end-of-life e.g. SharePoint 2007, Lotus Notes No integration with Google Apps, users have to switch between multiple interfaces Poor user experience

AODocs solves customer challenges

Benefits and ROI examples

Cost savings (approx. 70%) by leveraging Google Drive storage

For a 50,000-user company, AODocs cut DMS cost from $1M to $200,000

Same or better document management features than legacy products Preserve existing metadata, versions, permissions, document history, etc Seamless user experience, tightly integrated with Google Drive Other systems supported: Lotus Notes, Quickr, eRoom,

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

The money saved on legacy systems can be used to pay for the D4W upgrade!

Current customers Manufacturing:

Media:

Healthcare:

Technology:

Agriculture:

80

Organize, manage, and publish: policies, procedures, and employee manuals Customer Director or Head of Human Resources Senior or Chief Risk Officer Senior or Chief Compliance Officer Information Security Officer Directory or VP, Quality Assurance Directory or VP, Health and Safety

Customer challenges Policies and procedures must be periodically reviewed and updated Employees waste lots of time searching for the right documents Following outdated or invalid procedures can result in costly human errors and cause accidents Improper employee training can end up with large fines and lawsuits Comply with regulations, e.g., OSHA, ISO 9001:2016

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

AODocs solves customer challenges

Benefits and ROI examples

Employees have easy Avoid regulatory fines by access to the right version of demonstrating “best the right policies and effort” in providing procedures employees with the right resources Document approval and publication processes are Retailer in CA entered a automated $150m settlement for alleged violations of state hazmat laws Periodic review is automated Ross fined $3.9m for selling banned children’s upper outerwear containing drawstrings

Current customers Manufacturing:

Healthcare:

Pharma:

Agriculture:

81

Organize, manage, and publish: company assets and reference documents Customer

Customer challenges

AODocs solves customer challenges

Benefits and ROI examples

Chief Marketing Officer

Employees waste lots of time searching for the right documents

Employees have easy access to the right version of the right documents

Consistent usage of up-to-date versions and approved reference documents

Using outdated or invalid documents like logos, business templates, sales presentations can hurt the company’s image

Sharing permissions are automated: employees have access only to approved documents

Chief Communication Officer Chief Brand Officer Senior Director Marketing Product Manager

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Employees share company documents via emails and personal Drive, creating a large number of duplicates

Document revision, approval and publication processes are automated Document libraries can be published on the company’s intranet

Avoid costly errors from using old document versions Increase employee productivity with easily accessible, updated versions: when looking for documents, 71% of employees trawl corporate network/ server, 60% send email/IM requesting it, 35% call someone for it

Current customers Retail:

Pharma:

Technology:

82

Apply document retention policies Customer

Customer challenges

Chief General Counsel

Hundreds of different retention rules to apply, based on fine grained categorization of documents

Chief Legal Counsel Senior Legal Counsel Chief Privacy Officer Records Manager

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Retention rules must be applied on all Google Drive documents

AODocs solves customer challenges

Benefits and ROI examples

Easily configure document retention rules, leveraging document categorization with structured properties

Avoid regulatory fines by ensuring proper retention of documents that must be preserved

Apply retention rules to all Google Drive documents Minimize litigation risks by removing documents that don’t need to be preserved

Current customers Manufacturin g:

29% of U.S. businesses are in at least one litigation matter in any given year; 32% battling lawsuits involving $20 million or more UBS paid $29.3 million in damages after failure to produce subpoenaed emails in employment discrimination lawsuit

83

Automate business processes Customer

Customer challenges

Chief Revenue Officer

Cumbersome to manually approve invoices, project plans, and procurement documents

Senior Director or Chief Finance Officer Head of accounts receivable or payable Project manager Senior Procurement Supply chain manager Director or Head, Human Resources

Altirnao Proprietary and Confidential

Timelines are stretched, delivery deadlines are missed Employee onboarding missteps leads to frustration and missed opportunities Inappropriate materials delivered due to human error Lack of audit trail

AODocs solves customer challenges

Benefits and ROI examples

Manual processes are automated

Improve process productivity and throughput

Access permissions are automated: employees have access only to appropriate documents Document revisions and approvals are automated and appropriately routed

Improve cash-flow with tightened invoicing processes

Current customers Manufacturing:

Construction:

Increase employee productivity Deliver projects on time

Complete audit trail for supply chain

Lawsuits under ‘transparency in supply chain’ laws are abundant - with Costco, Travis Perkins and others already named defendants.

84

City Council Agenda Item Report Submitted by: Tracy Beck Submitting Department: City Manager Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: Mayor's Comments Recommendation: Petitioner: Andy Barton, City Manager Is this a budgeted item? No Fiscal Impact:

Background: Contract Bid Expires On: Attachments: 

85

City Council Agenda Item Report Submitted by: Tracy Beck Submitting Department: City Manager Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: City Council and Staff Reports Recommendation: Petitioner: Andy Barton, City Barton Is this a budgeted item? No Fiscal Impact:

Background: Contract Bid Expires On: Attachments: 

86

City Council Agenda Item 8 Submitted by: Andy Barton Submitting Department: City Manager Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: Consideration of a management classification and compensation system and other matters properly related thereto. - Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Recommendation: Direct the City Manager to implement the management classification and compensation system starting FY17-18. Petitioner: Andy Barton, City Manager Is this a budgeted item? Yes Fiscal Impact: There are no impacts during the current fiscal year (FY16-17). That said, the impact will occur during FY17-18. The total impact to FY17-18 is indeterminable at this time. Background: During the September 27, 2016 City Council meeting, the Council approved the hiring of a consulting firm, Pontifex Consulting Group, to conduct a review of the City’s management compensation structure and benefits plans. The purpose is to ensure that the City can attract, retain and reward employees in those roles. Pontifex has completed the agreed upon work. Attached is the final report, presentation and a possible scenarios for implementing the recommendations. Contract Bid Expires On:

Attachments:  September 27, 2016 Agenda Item.pdf  Classification and Compensation Study 11.2016.pdf  Council Briefing 3.14.2017.pptx

87

City Council Agenda Item Report Submitted by: Aaron Baker Submitting Department: City Manager Meeting Date: September 27, 2016

Subject: Consideration of approval to hire a consulting firm to review management compensation practices and provide recommendations and other matters properly related thereto. - Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Recommendation: Approve the expenditure of $9,750 for a review and direct the City Manager to retain Pontifex Consulting Group to conduct the review. Petitioner: Andy Barton, City Manager Is this a budgeted item? No Fiscal Impact: A review was not contemplated during the annual budgeting process; therefore, the $9,750 will come from multiple sources of savings in the budget. Background: Over the past few years, several different methods have been used to compensate management employees. This study is an attempt to create a uniform system for evaluating and compensating management. The review would include examining current positions, current compensation, span of control, overall responsibilities, and experience. The recommendations will also include a fair and systematic way for management employees to be compensated. The consultant will provide a report outlining the recommendations, reasons, timelines, action steps and responsible parties. Please note that the intent is not to change any of the existing compensation structures in place. Rather, it would allow for the management employees who currently aren’t include in a structure to have uniform 255 275 88 system whereby they are compensated.

The City solicited proposals from three different consultants--Pontifex Consulting Group, CPS HR, and Kaercher Insurance. Below is a list of the proposal costs. Pontifex Consulting Group - $9,750 includes travel CPS HR - $18,950 does not include travel Kaercher Insurance - $28,800 does not include travel Pontifex Consulting Group is a human resource consulting firm. They pride themselves on tailoring their work to the clients’ needs. Pontifex has done work throughout Nevada. Currently, Pontifex is doing similar work for the Las Vegas-Clark County Library District. Peter Ronza is the president. Contract Bid Expires On: Attachments:  Pontifex Proposal.pdf

256 276 89

August 21, 2016

Aaron Baker City Liaison Officer City of Mesquite 10 East Mesquite Boulevard Mesquite, NV 89027 Dear Aaron: Please accept the attached proposal in response to your request for information on a Management Compensation Review at the City of Mesquite. The Pontifex Consulting Group is experienced in conducting studies similar to yours in comparable organizations both as practitioners and consultants. We are confident that we can deliver to you quality service that is second to none. We have attached a concise proposal that will provide the following information:     

Firm Background Staff Resumes Proposed Work Program References Cost Proposal

We very much appreciate the opportunity to submit this information and look forward to assisting you in performing these consulting services. Should you need any additional information or have questions regarding our attached proposal or fee schedule, please call me at 612.803.3516 or email at [email protected]. Sincerely,

Peter Ronza, CCP, SPHR President

257 90

FIRM BACKGROUND The Pontifex Consulting Group LLC was formed by human resources professionals who have extensive experience as both practitioners and consultants in compensation, benefits and other human resources disciplines. We recognize that your employees are your greatest investment and that they are the key element to the success of your organization. That fact alone requires that you employ a consultant who is experienced and accountable. Our goal is to provide a service experience that is second to none. You should experience nothing less. Our goal is to satisfy our customer’s needs with solutions that will work in relation to your culture. We do not believe in recommending “cookie-cutter” products or automated programs that are revised to adapt to your organization. There are as many different methods of classifying and compensating employees as there are different varieties of organizations. That kind of service takes time and effort and is the only way we know of to provide you with the quality professional products that get you where you want to be. We provide personalized services that are reasonably priced. Your project is serviced from beginning to end with service to you, our customer, as our primary objective. Compensation is a very sensitive issue and we treat it as such. For an employer it is their largest investment and for employees it means putting food on the table and a roof over their head. We take our responsibility very seriously. Our services are reasonably priced due to the fact that we do not have extensive overhead that we are relying on our clients to support. Through the efficient and effective use of technology and our experience, we can give our clients first class service at affordable prices. We expect to deliver the same value as what we would expect if we were in our client’s shoes. The consultants assigned to your project are the people who are committed to your project’s success. We do not dazzle you on-site with talent and then come back home to assign your project to a room full of neophyte employees. Our consultants have many years of professional experience in performing services similar to what is being proposed to your organization. If you have a question or issue, your consultant will be able to address it to your satisfaction. We are a 100% minority and VA certified veteran owned business. Nevada Business ID #20131285219

2

258 91

Key differentiators from our competitors: 

Expertise – The depth of professional experience and skills of staff assigned to this project (as outlined in resume section) is second to none. We have provided services to a wide variety of industries both as consultants and practitioners. We also “give back” to the professional community through publishing, speaking at professional conferences and teaching.



Custom Solutions – There is no “one solution” for an organization or industry. We take the time to assess your culture, needs, and objectives. There are many different methods by which to compensate employees and the solution for your organization must “fit” your organization to be successful. We will never recommend an “off-theshelf” product that we have used for all our clients. That is against our professional ethics and would ask that you retain another firm if you desire that kind of deliverable.



Service – What you see is what you get. The practitioners who will appear on your worksite at the project implementation meetings will be the individuals who service your contract from beginning to end. We do not have a cadre of neophyte analysts who will be given your project once the team has returned from your organization. If you need to contact us, we will be available. If you need changes, they will be discussed an executed. This is not our project, it is your project.



Honesty – We are being engaged to ensure quality and success. That requires that we engage in a professionally honest relationship. We will present you with options, opinions and recommendations. We are being retained due to our professional experience as your consultants and will engage in such a manner.



Familiarity with Public Sector – Although we have provided services for the public sector market, we also have been practitioners within institutions. This gives us a valuable insight into the issues and cultural issues that come into play when designing, implementing and maintaining compensation systems. Peter Ronza served as Director of Compensation at Clark County, Nevada (10,000 employees). He understands the public sector environment and the need to provide a fiscally responsible and equitable wage to those who work on the front line.

3

259 92

How can the City assess the Consultant’s performance?        

Consultant’s understanding of City’s culture, mission and strategy. Consultant’s understanding of City’s current issues surrounding the classification and compensation systems. Consultant’s professionalism in dealing with City’s questions and concerns. Consultant’s understanding of City’s jobs and how they function. How well the recommended classification structure fits City’s compensation philosophy. City’s understanding of the new compensation structure. How well the recommended salary structure and pay practices fit the City’s total compensation philosophy. How the transition plan meets the needs and considers the City’s financial resources.

4

260 93

STAFF RESUMES PETER RONZA, CCP, SPHR – President Mr. Ronza will be responsible for managing the project and providing consulting services. He has over thirty years of experience in health care, banking, higher education, government and as a consultant for a variety of industries. He also has been called upon as a resource based on his expertise by print and video media (NBC Nightly News, Wall Street Journal, US News & World Report). Mr. Ronza is an Adjunct Professor for graduate and undergraduate programs at the Human Resources and Industrial Relations Department of the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota. He also served as an Adjunct Professor at the Organizational Learning and Development Department at the University of St. Thomas. Mr. Ronza is also an expert on regulatory issues such as the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). He has assisted a variety of clients in ensuring that they are in compliance with overtime and equal pay provisions of the act. He advises clients on designing their workforce structures to ensure that they are in compliance with regulations while at the same time achieving organizational objectives. Mr. Ronza has a Master’s degree in Human Resources/Industrial Relations from the University of Minnesota. Mr. Ronza is a member of: 

WorldatWork (formerly American Compensation Association) and has his Certified Compensation Professional (CCP) certification.



Society for Human Resources Management and has his Senior Professional Human Resources (SPHR) certification. He also served on the Total Rewards Special Expertise Panel (2005-2008) and the Ethics Special Expertise Panel (2010-2012) that provided advice and professional services to the 250,000 members of SHRM.

5

261 94

ROBERT GREENE, Ph.D. – Consulting Principal Dr. Greene is a Consulting Principal with our compensation and human resources management consulting practice. He will be responsible for cultural assessment, quality assurance and composition of the final report. He has over forty years of human resources consulting experience with a wide variety of organizations. Dr. Greene is an expert on consulting with organizations on formulating human resources management strategies and designing, implementing, administering and evaluating performance and compensation management programs. He also provides counsel on defining, assessing and reshaping organizational culture and the effective management of cross-cultural workforces. Dr. Greene has published over 100 articles, white papers and book chapters on HR and compensation management, performance management, organizational culture and change management. He was awarded the first Keystone Award for attaining the highest level of excellence in the field by the American Compensation Association (now WorldatWork). He serves as adjunct faculty at DePaul University and a faculty member for the CPHRC certification program offered in countries around the world. Mr. Greene has a Ph.D. in Applied Behavioral Science from Northwestern University and an MBA from the University of Chicago. Dr. Greene is a member of: 

WorldatWork (formerly ACA) and has his Certified Compensation Professional (CCP), Certified Benefits Professional (CBP) and Global Remuneration Professional (GRP) certifications.



Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) and has his Senior Professional Human Resources (SPHR), Global Professional Human Resources (GPHR) and SHRM-SCP certifications. He has served as a designer and faculty member for SHRM’s professional development programs and was a principal designer of the PHR/SPHR certifications.



Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP), a division of the American Psychological Association.



Mensa Society

6

262 95

DAVID GRAMER, CCP, PHR - Senior Consultant Mr. Gramer will be responsible for providing market analysis and compensation system design services on this project. He has over ten years of compensation experience, four of which were with a regional consulting firm. Mr. Gramer has a Master’s degree in Business Administration from the University of St. Thomas. Mr. Gramer is a member of: 

WorldatWork (formerly American Compensation Association) and has his Certified Compensation Professional (CCP) certification.



Society for Human Resources Management and has his Professional Human Resources (PHR) certification.

7

263 96

SCOPE OF SERVICES The purpose of the comprehensive compensation study is to evaluate the internal equity and labor market competitiveness of the compensation and classification plans of management staff at the City of Mesquite (City). Given our desire to provide customized service to the City, we believe our proposal is straightforward and identifies the core elements of the study. Our services are flexible so as to take into account your needs and any conclusions or requirements during the project. The Pontifex Consulting Group (Consultant) will perform the following tasks to achieve the City’s objectives: Phase I 

Project Initiation – The Consultant will meet with City executive management to discuss organizational objectives and cultural perspectives to ensure that they are taken into account in the development of programs that will serve your needs today and in the future. We will also executives and managers to discuss issues and concerns.



Examination of Current Programs - The Consultant will review existing job descriptions, organization charts, job evaluation and salary administration methodology, and all other relevant job classification material, as well as conduct meetings with Human Resources staff. These actions will allow us to provide recommendations on how to guide the study to a successful completion.



Total Compensation Philosophy – The Consultant will confirm the City’s Total Compensation (compensation and benefits) philosophy and assist in the drafting of an official document, if required. It is critical for the success of the study for the Consultant to completely understand how the City utilizes its resources to attract, retain and motivate its employees.



Initial Employee Communication - The Consultant will conduct onsite employee briefing sessions. These meetings will communicate the study’s objectives and allow for employee input. We will also walk through the questionnaire and explain its use and intent. This will lessen anxiety and increase the quality of input.



Project Administration – The Consultant will work with the City to confirm the schedule of deliverables for the study. We will also clarify involvement of the City’s staff to ensure timely completion of tasks, meeting logistics, approval of documents and distribution of communication materials.

8

264 97

Phase II 

Position Information – Consultant will provide a Position Description Questionnaire (PDQ) that will be distributed to all employees for them and their supervisor to complete with relevant information in regard to their job’s duties, responsibilities and requirements. Based on analysis of the PDQs, Consultant will perform selected on site visits and phone conferences with supervisors to gain a complete understanding of operations and the City’s jobs.



Finalize Job Descriptions – Consultant will develop new/revised job descriptions, ensuring all requirements regarding essential functions and minimum qualifications are included. Job descriptions will also include requirements for the ADA, EEO standards, and other legally required information in a clearly identified format that is appropriate for each classification. Consultant will also determine the appropriate Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) overtime eligibility status of each job using current United States Department of Labor FLSA guidelines. NOTE: On May 18, 2016, the United States Department of Labor (DOL) posted the final regulatory changes to the FLSA that will become effective December 1, 2016. The Consultant will use this new guidance when conducting exemption tests and will provide appropriate compliance documentation.



Review Phase - Employees and supervisors will review and comment on job description drafts. Consultant will revise, as necessary, and communicate with each employee and supervisor who provided input.



Outline Job Analysis Methodology and Structure - The Consultant will then develop a classification structure and methodology that is appropriate for the City’s organizational structure and culture. We do not sell a “one-size-fits-all” methodology as a solution to your needs. The structure must also be constructed in a way that will allow the City to maintain and administer the system after the study is completed.



Pay-for-Performance - The Consultant will discuss options for a pay-for-performance system that distributes pay increases in accordance with employee performance. City will discuss and comment on proposals and Consultant will revise recommendations as required.

9

265 98

Phase III 

Collect Labor Market Data - The Consultant will work together with the City to identify the appropriate competitive labor market and comparable organizations from which to obtain compensation data. The Consultant will design custom market survey(s) as required to collect compensation data from targeted organizations identified by the City as direct competitors/comparators. We have an extensive database of published survey sources to obtain data necessary for analysis of private sector compensation in the areas where the City competes for labor.



Market Data Analysis - The Consultant will collect and analyze data to ensure accuracy and reliability of data. We will then analyze the current compensation of the City’s employees in relation to the competitive labor market data to determine City’s positioning, both on an individual and aggregate basis.



Collect Labor Market Benefits Data - The Consultant will also collect benefits plan data from the labor market competitors used for the compensation analysis. The Consultant will compare City benefits to the market in the areas of medical, life insurance, and paid time off.



Salary Structure Design & Implementation - The Consultant will develop compensation ranges that will be joined to the classification structure to provide internal and external equity for the City’s compensation system. The recommendations will also be designed to avoid possible salary compression in the future. Consultant will also provide financial impact scenarios to assist the City in the implementation of said recommendations.



Employee Training and Maintenance – The Consultant will provide training to key employees and other staff regarding how to maintain the classification and compensation programs. Again, our goal is to provide you a system that requires little outside involvement from a consultant. This training includes the ability to classify and price jobs within the recommended system. Included with this training are policies and manuals that will address procedures, adjustment practices and career progression processes.

10

266 99

DESCRIPTION OF DELIVERABLES The Consultant will prepare a report summarizing the processes used to conduct the study and the findings and recommendations of the study. The City will have an opportunity to review and discuss the report with the Consultant. Based on these discussions, the Consultant will update and finalize the report. The report will include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

A detailed summary of the classification (internal equity) analysis. Results of the comparative compensation and benefits (external equity) analysis. FLSA analyses and documentation. All data utilized to produce the analysis. New/updated job descriptions for all City management jobs. A complete classification system for all City management jobs. A base compensation structure(s) for all City management jobs. Recommendations on benefits plan revisions. Recommendations on how to transition from the current to the new system. Recommendations on a process to update and keep the system current. Policy language recommendations. Training for key City staff on the system’s policies, procedures and maintenance practices. Financial impact analyses on the implementation of Consultant’s recommendations.

The end result is to design, implement and maintain a compensation system that allows for the recruitment, retention and recognition of employees while adhering to the compensation philosophy of the City. Consultant will be available to make presentations to the City Council, management and staff as required. All study documentation, manuals and materials will be provided to the City in electronic formats (Windows compatible files). There is no need or value for the City to expend additional resources to acquire a licensed automated system. Maintenance can easily be performed by the City staff utilizing Excel and their existing HRIS system.

11

100 267

REFERENCES Carson City, Nevada We conducted a compensation and classification study for 500 represented and non-represented staff, to include public safety. This included completion of PDQs, review of draft classification descriptions, a combination of labor market analyses based upon custom and published survey sources. The result was the design of new classification descriptions, classification structure, salary ranges, compensation philosophy and pay practices for the organization to include union and nonunion jobs. We were subsequently retained to design and implement a performance management program. This included the training of all supervisors and employees at the City. Contact: Melanie Bruketta, Director Human Resources, 775.283.7088, [email protected]

Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada (RTC) We completed various projects for the agency: development of compensation, classification and benefits programs for non-represented management employees (12 positions), comprehensive classification and compensation study for union-represented staff employees (260 positions), and development of a performance management system for management staff. The studies involved the analysis of all jobs and composition of new classification specifications, as well as labor market analysis and composition of new salary ranges for those new classifications. We also assisted in collective bargaining negotiations sessions as requested. We have continued to provide market analysis, classification system maintenance and organizational analysis services on an on-call basis. Most recently, a compensation analysis was conducted of staff and management classifications for purposes of collective bargaining support. Contact: Jerry Keating, former Assistant General Manager, 702.785.7062 [email protected]

Las Vegas-Clark County Library District, Nevada We have been retained to conduct a classification and compensation study for Library District staff. This has involved completion of job questionnaires by all District staff, construction of job descriptions, compensation analyses based upon custom and published surveys. Contact: Jerilynn Gregory, Human Resources Director, 702.507.6241 [email protected] 12

101 268

STUDY FEES Total cost for the study is proposed at $9,750. This is an estimate based upon the employee population and services mentioned in your review request. All travel and out-of-pocket expenses to be incurred by the Consultant are included in the proposal pricing. The following line item schedule summarizes the different study tasks costs: Project Initiation and On-site Presentations

$ 2,500

Classification Analysis

$ 2,000

Compensation Analysis

$ 2,500

Summary Report & Presentations

$ 2,750

TOTAL COST

$ 9,750

We have reduced the compensation analysis study fees proposal to reflect the fact that data that has been collected from other consulting efforts in the competitive labor market within the past six (6) months that will be of value in this study. Consultant will invoice the City upon completion and acceptance of project phase deliverables. Payment is due to Consultant within thirty (30) days of the City receiving invoice for payment. The Consultant agrees to answer questions and provide implementation assistance at no additional cost pertaining to this study for at least twelve (12) months following the date of study completion to ensure that the system/products that we have provided are administered properly. Ongoing Consulting Services We would be happy to quote a flat rate that is more equitable to the achievement of desired tasks and mindful of the financial resources of the City.    

Job description grading and FLSA analysis = $200 per job Market Analysis and recommendations = $100 per job Hourly Rate = $200 Onsite consulting = $2,500 per day includes travel and expenses.

13

102 269

Classification & Compensation Study City of Mesquite, Nevada Final Report November 2016 Pontifex Consulting Group LLC

103

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page I.

Introduction

3

II.

Human Capital Issues and Compensation Philosophy

4

III.

Classification Study

9

IV.

Compensation Analysis

12

V.

Summary and Recommendations

24

Appendix A – Classification Structure

31

Appendix B – Compensation Survey Participants

35

Appendix C – Compensation Policies for Non-Represented Staff

37

Page | 2

104

Introduction

What was the Pontifex Consulting Group (PCG) asked to do? The objectives of the study were to: 

Validate the compensation philosophy and its alignment to the City of Mesquite’s (City) strategy and direction.



Review job content information for City non-represented jobs.



Examine current compensation programs and structures for City non-represented jobs.



Analyze current competitive labor market compensation and benefits practices.



Provide recommendations for classification structures (internal equity).



Provide recommendations for compensation structures (labor market equity).



Provide recommendations for maintenance of classification and compensation systems.



Prepare a written report of our findings and comparisons.

This report covers all of these objectives.

Page | 3

105

II. Human Capital Issues and Compensation Philosophy

Page | 4

106

Human Resources Issues

The City’s mission of providing service to the public requires the attraction and retention of key talent to fill staff jobs. These are jobs that have a significant depth in customer service, technical and scientific competencies, while at the same time possessing advanced skills in project coordination and team-building. These unique skills are essential for staff to be successful at carryingout the City’s mission in an effective and efficient manner. Specifically, the City intends to: o o o o o

Page | 5

Become the employer of choice for key staff talent necessary to meet its core mission. Retain key staff and prevent “poaching” from other agencies. Maintain a competitive, market driven compensation system. Maintain a performance-based, results oriented culture. Engage in succession planning efforts for staff and management positions.

107

Compensation Strategy

The City currently compensates its staff in accordance with a classification and compensation system that is internally focused. It appears to have not been aligned to the changing workforce and competitive labor market changes of the past ten years. The compensation of an organization’s staff normally follows an established compensation philosophy and strategy. Such strategic documents are critical towards alignment of the organization’s largest budgetary expenditure towards organizational needs and fiscal resources. A survey of 2,025 organizations across the United States shows that a majority of respondents have a stated compensation strategy of paying at or above the labor market rate for their jobs: Employee Group Hourly Employees

Pay Below Market Rate 1.7%

Pay Equal to Market Rate 85.0%

Pay Above Market Rate 5.5%

Other Percentile or No Strategy 8.8%

Salaried Employees

2.3%

86.5%

7.1%

4.1%

Management/Executive Employees

1.7%

76.5%

9.7%

11.1%

SOURCE: World-at-Work (American Compensation Association) 2016/2017 Salary Budget Survey.

Page | 6

108

Compensation Strategy

The “Employer Costs for Employee Compensation” survey is produced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor to show what employer’s average hourly costs are for compensation and its components. Listed below are comparative figures for wages (no benefits data included) between 2009 and 2015:

Private Sector Employers All Private Employers

Cost Compensation 2015 $22.14

% Increase +14.1%

-

Management/Professionals

$32.16

$38.75

+20.5%

-

Office & Administrative Support

$15.65

$16.54

+5.7%

-

Service Occupations

$10.32

$11.27

+9.2%

Cost Compensation 2009 $26.11

Cost Compensation 2015 $28.63

State & Government Employers All State & Local Government Employers

Page | 7

Cost Compensation 2009 $19.41

% Increase +9.7%

-

Management/Professionals

$32.54

$35.87

+10.2%

-

Office & Administrative Support

$17.02

$18.52

+8.9%

-

Service Occupations

$17.72

$19.73

+11.3%

109

Compensation Strategy

The following chart shows the wage increases granted by the City between 2011 and 2016 for the different employee groups:

City Police Union Staff 4.25%

City Fire Union Staff 0.0%

City Non-Rep Staff

2011

City Union Staff 2.25%

2012

2.25%

4.0%

0.0%

5.0%

2013

4.0%-5.0%

2.0%

0.0%

0.0%

2014

4.0%-5.0%

4.5%-6.0%

4.0%-5.0%

0.0%

2015

4.0%-5.0%

4.5%-6.0%

4.0%-5.0%

5.0%*

2016

3.0%-5.0% 3.3% to 4.0%

4.5%-6.0% 4.0% to 4.7%

4.0%-5.0% 2.0% to 2.5%

0.0% 0.8% OR 0.0%

Year

Average 2011-2016

-5.0%

*5% for select management employees who had not had a salary increase in at least two (2) years.

Page | 8

110

III. Classification Study

Page | 9

111

Classification Study

Methodology Pete Ronza of the Pontifex Consulting Group (PCG), met with the City Manager, Director of Human Resources, and members of the management team in October of 2016 to discuss the project work plan, deliverables, and the City’s issues/concerns with their classification and compensation programs for non-represented staff. The City provided PCG with a complete set of current job descriptions and organization charts for City non-represented jobs. The job descriptions were of critical importance in describing:        

Duties and Responsibilities; Knowledge and Skills required to perform those responsibilities and duties; Education and/or Experience levels required to perform duties and responsibilities; Supervisory responsibilities; Scope of Decision-making; Delegation of Authority; Physical Demands; and, Environmental and Working Conditions.

Page | 10

112

Classification Study

Methodology (continued) PCG reviewed the job descriptions and performed any necessary follow-up questions or clarifications with City staff by phone and by email. After the review process was complete, PCG conducted Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) tests to ensure that City jobs are properly classified in accordance with federal regulations. This process is discussed in more detail on page 31 of this report. PCG then developed a recommendation for new classification structures that combine jobs of similar levels of duties, responsibilities, knowledge, skills, education and experience. This new structure also creates appropriate career ladders and job families in accordance with the existing mix of jobs, the mission and strategy of the City. The recommendations were discussed with the City’s management in October of 2016. PCG then created compensation recommendations based upon the population of classifications in the structures and their competitive labor market data. The recommendations for revisions to existing system and for creation of a new system can be found in Appendix A.

Page | 11

113

IV. Compensation Analysis

Page | 12

114

Competitive Compensation Analysis

Methodology Pete Ronza of the Pontifex Consulting Group (PCG), met with the City Manager, City Liaison Officer and the Director of Human Resources in October of 2016 to discuss the project work plan, deliverables, and the City’s compensation philosophy and strategy. PCG discussed and received direction to provide a compensation study based upon two (2) labor market comparator groups: • •

Private sector employers in Nevada. Selected public sector agencies in Nevada.

The compensation analysis was conducted in October of 2016. For those jobs that are recruited from the overall labor market (public and private), PCG obtained comparable information from the private sector. Examples of jobs that are recruited and retained from the private sector would be occupations in the areas of finance, information technology and human resources. Salary information for private sector organizations was obtained from: 

Towers Watson Data Services, United States employer surveys.

A majority of the City’s jobs only exist in public sector organizations. Therefore, the public sector is one of the City’s primary competitors for talent. PCG developed a list of public sector comparable agencies in the State of Nevada to survey for the purpose of obtaining compensation and benefits data for this sector. A list of the agencies who responded can be found in Appendix B. Overall responsibilities, specific duties and education and experience requirements for City job classifications were referenced to provide accurate matching.

Page | 13

115

Competitive Compensation Analysis

Methodology (continued) Data reflect market pay levels updated to November 1, 2016. Survey data provide critical competitive salary information; however, compensation of individual positions may differ from the target labor market for many reasons, including stage of organizational growth, organizational performance and the qualifications, specific responsibilities and performance of the individual position incumbents. Jobs were matched based on content, responsibilities, level and qualifications and not on title alone. For this reason, the titles in the market will not necessarily be the same titles as those employed by the City. Due to Sherman Antitrust Act consent decrees, only summary (aggregate) data are shown for each benchmark. Since the City is a unique organization, a comparison with other similar organizations and similar positions needs to be viewed as a reference point. It would be an error to directly adopt the compensation levels of other organizations without carefully analyzing the factors that make the City unique, and which make each staff employee valuable to the City. For example, there is a legitimate organizational reason for paying some City jobs more or less than market due to the difference in scope, services, organizational priorities, and population with services provided by other agencies. To maintain data integrity, we can only use valid data provided to us through our survey process in order to conduct a professional and objective analysis of the information.

Page | 14

116

Competitive Compensation Analysis

Salary Range Minimum Rate The minimum salary range rate represents the minimum rate of pay that an employer will pay for a job/skill set. This is usually understood to be where the organization would set the pay rate for an incumbent who has the minimal level of education and experience required for a job (attraction rate). The chart on page 16 shows the overall comparison of the competitive labor market minimum salary range averages and the City’s salary range minimum rates.

Page | 15

117

Competitive Compensation Analysis

Salary Range Minimum Rates

Job Title Accountant Athletics & Leisure Associate City Attorney City Clerk City Liaison City Manager Deputy City Attorney Deputy Fire Chief Director Athletics & Leisure Director Development Services Director Finance Director Human Resources Director IT Director Public Works Engineer Engineering Technician Fire Chief Manager Facilities Manager Streets, Drainage & Fleet Police Captain Police Chief Police Lieutenant WWTP Superintendent

Page | 16

City Minimum Salary Range Rate $48,000 $62,500 $88,000 $62,500 $62,500 $110,000 $62,500 $62,500 $74,500 $74,500 $74,500 $74,500 $74,500 $74,500 $68,750 $68,750 $88,000 $62,500 $62,500 $85,000 $88,000 $80,000 $62,500

Market Average Minimum Salary Range Rate $50,771 $56,036 $86,507 $62,246 $69,127 $112,868 $62,198 $83782 $81,881 $76,583 $72,296 $57,678 $76,583 $78,960 $77,217 $48,474 $96,803 $60,191 $60,495 $79,009 $98,495 $68,902 $64,243

City as a Percent of Market Average Rate -5.5% +11.5% +1.7% +0.4% -9.6% -2.5% +0.5% -25.4% -9.0% -2.7% +3.0% +29.2% -2.7% -5.6% -11.0% +41.8% -9.1% +3.8% +3.3% +7.6% -10.7% +16.1% -2.7%

118

Competitive Compensation Analysis

Salary Range Maximum Rate The maximum salary range rate represents the maximum rate of pay that an employer will pay for a job/skill set. This is usually understood to be where the organization would set the pay rate for an incumbent who has an above average level of education and experience (retention rate). The chart on page 18 shows the overall comparison of the competitive labor market maximum salary range averages and the City’s salary range maximum rates.

Page | 17

119

Competitive Compensation Analysis

Salary Range Maximum Rates

Job Title Accountant Athletics & Leisure Associate City Attorney City Clerk City Liaison City Manager Deputy City Attorney Deputy Fire Chief Director Athletics & Leisure Director Development Services Director Finance Director Human Resources Director IT Director Public Works Engineer Engineering Technician Fire Chief Manager Facilities Manager Streets, Drainage & Fleet Police Captain Police Chief Police Lieutenant WWTP Superintendent

Page | 18

City Maximum Salary Range Rate $70,000 $85,000 $131,000 $85,000 $85,000 $148,000 $85,000 $85,000 $110,000 $110,000 $110,000 $110,000 $110,000 $110,000 $100,000 $100,000 $131,000 $85,000 $85,000 $110,000 $131,000 $105,000 $85,000

Market Average Maximum Salary Range Rate $77,173 $79,706 $135,836 $90,974 $97,953 $154,435 $91,319 $123,985 $121,428 $109,331 $111,376 $83,498 $109,331 $115,131 $101,910 $64,841 $142,628 $82,717 $83,174 $92,783 $132,465 $88,032 $88,314

City as a Percent of Market Average Rate -9.3% +6.6% -3.6% -6.6% -13.2% -4.2% -6.9% -31.4% -9.4% +0.6% -1.2% +31.7% +0.6% -4.5% -1.9% +54.2% -8.2% +2.8% +2.2% +18.6% -1.1% +19.3% -3.8%

120

Competitive Compensation Analysis

Salary Range Midpoint Rate The midpoint of the salary range represents the midpoint of the range of pay that an employer will pay for a job/skill set. This is usually understood to be where the organization would set the pay rate for an incumbent who has a journey-level education and experience. From an experience level this is generally understood to be 4-5 years. The chart on page 20 shows the overall comparison of the competitive labor market midpoint salary range averages and the City’s salary range midpoint rates.

Page | 19

121

Competitive Compensation Analysis

Salary Range Midpoint Rates

Job Title Accountant Athletics & Leisure Associate City Attorney City Clerk City Liaison City Manager Deputy City Attorney Deputy Fire Chief Director Athletics & Leisure Director Development Services Director Finance Director Human Resources Director IT Director Public Works Engineer Engineering Technician Fire Chief Manager Facilities Manager Streets, Drainage & Fleet Police Captain Police Chief Police Lieutenant WWTP Superintendent

Page | 20

City Midpoint Salary Range Rate $59,000 $73,750 $100,500 $73,750 $73,750 $139,000 $73,750 $73,750 $92,250 $92,250 $92,250 $92,250 $92,250 $92,250 $84,375 $84,375 $109,500 $73,750 $73,750 $98,397 $109,500 $92,610 $73,750

Market Average Midpoint Salary Range Rate $67,417 $67,670 $115,472 $85,616 $82,985 $137,603 $76,647 $103,380 $105,263 $99,480 $108,500 $75,359 $92,501 $103,811 $86,406 $56,618 $121,123 $71,253 $71,634 $85,465 $119,694 $77,845 $76,077

City as a Percent of Market Average Rate -12.5% +9.0% -13.0% -13.9% -11.1% +1.0% -3.8% -28.7% -12.4% -7.3% -15.0% +22.4% -0.3% -11.1% -2.4% +49.0% -9.6% +3.5% +3.0% +15.1% -8.5% +19.0% -3.1%

122

Competitive Compensation Analysis

Private Sector Salary Range Midpoint Rate A majority of the City’s jobs only exist in the public sector. However, there are jobs that are interchangeable between the public and private sectors. PCG has identified those positions that have valid comparable labor market data and constructed a comparison of those sectors. The midpoint of the salary range represents the midpoint of the range of pay that an employer will pay for a job/skill set. This is usually understood to be where the organization would set the pay rate for an incumbent who has a journey-level education and experience. From an experience level this is generally understood to be 4-5 years. The chart on page 22 shows the overall comparison of the private sector competitive labor market salary range midpoint rates and the City’s comparable salary range midpoint rates.

Page | 21

123

Competitive Compensation Analysis

Salary Range Midpoint Rates – Private Sector Employers

Job Title Accountant Director Finance Director Human Resources Director IT Engineer Manager Facilities Systems Administrator

Page | 22

City Midpoint Salary Range Rate $59,000 $92,250 $92,250 $92,250 $84,375 $73,750 $59,000

Market Average Midpoint Salary Range Rate $61,400 $88,300 $85,900 $111,400 $93,000 $74,700 $63,000

City as a Percent of Market Average Rate -3.9% +4.5% +7.4% -17.2% -9.3% -1.3% -6.3%

124

Competitive Compensation Analysis

City in comparison to market segment averages – Minimum Salary Range Rate +1.0% City in comparison to market segment averages – Maximum Salary Range Rate +1.4% City in comparison to market segment averages – Midpoint Salary Range Rate City as a Percent of Public Sector

City as a Percent of Private Sector

-1.3%

-3.7%

Page | 23

125

V. Summary and Recommendations

Page | 24

126

Classification Structure

Methodology PCG was tasked with provision of a recommendation on a new classification and compensation structure for the City to consider that would provide a balance between internal equity and external competitiveness. It would also need to be constructed in a way that would allow internal Human Resources staff the means to be able to maintain in a viable and equitable manner. The recommended structure mirrors the ten (10) job categories used by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to classify employees at all employer and industry groupings in the United States. The classification plan is included in Appendix A of this report. The City classification structure grades and corresponding EEOC job categories definitions are listed as follows: Grades T1 Technicians – Occupations which require a combination of basic scientific or technical knowledge and manual skill which can be obtained through specialized post-secondary school education or through equivalent on-the-job training. Grades P1 – P3 Professionals – Occupations which require specialized and theoretical knowledge which is usually acquired through college training or through work experience and other training which provides considerable knowledge. Grades M1, D1, E1 Supervisors, Managers, Directors and Executives – Occupations that are designated by the organization for responsibility over staff in a unit/division and has the authority to discipline, hire and terminate.

Page | 25

127

Compensation Structure

Base Salaries In setting the compensation of an individual employee, the City should consider such criteria as experience, value to the organization, scope and complexity of the position in relation to other positions at the same pay grade level. Par (average) performers are typically compensated at market rates and sub-par performers are typically compensated at below market rates. Consistent high level performers should be paid at or above the market rate for their jobs. PCG has recommended compensation structures that take into account labor market trends and avoid compression with bargaining unit groups. It is critical that appropriate spacing is maintained so as to enable promotion opportunities and retention of internal talent. NOTE: Actual incumbent employee pay level and position within the range is determined by years of service, performance and the individual’s knowledge, skills and experience. The lack of salary increases to non-represented staff in relation to represented staff (page 8) is of concern both from a retention and compression perspective. The labor market has not remained in a static state for the past six years, nor is there any indication that it would do so in the future. Therefore, the lack of a strategy to reward performance and compensate for labor market movement creates a situation where the City willfully undervalues its jobs and encourages turnover. A lack of a compensation strategy for non-represented staff also causes salary compression between them and the staff covered by bargaining units. This action will negatively impact the City’s ability to promote from within and gain advantage from its existing human capital. Some jobs at the City are showing signs of this compression effect. Appendix C includes draft language that PCG would recommend to provide consistent compensation practices that would allow the City to attract and retain the talent necessary to provide services to the public.

Page | 26

128

Compensation Structure

Salary Ranges PCG has utilized public sector labor market averages for salary range midpoint rates to construct and benchmark the City’s new compensation ranges. This is based upon: 

Average base salary rates reflect wages currently being paid to an organization’s incumbents. It carries a bias in that an organization could be paying high or low rates due to a variety of factors. Example: With recent downsizing in local public sector agencies, the higher seniority (higher paid) incumbents remain employed. This drives up the salary rate and does not reflect the reality of the worth of the job.



The midpoint rate reflects pay at the journey-level of a particular job. This is a professionally accepted data point used to construct a pay range that reflects the breadth of skill sets within a particular job and allows for valid pay range construction.



The Nevada Public Sector is the primary labor market from which the City competes for talent (attraction and retention) for the majority of its jobs.



City staff will be able to obtain pay range information more readily in order that they can benchmark and maintain the system in the future.

Page | 27

129

Summary and Recommendations

System Maintenance The market positioning of the City’s jobs should be reviewed on a scheduled basis. This will provide needed data necessary for use in calculating adjustments to the wage structure based upon labor market movement. There should be an established policy to ensure that a journey-level employee’s base compensation be 10% of the comparable labor market average midpoint rate for their particular classification. New jobs should be benched to the market to provide relevant salary data that will assist in recruitment and retention. It will also be of importance in the maintenance of the compensation system. New jobs and reclassifications can be classified by City Human Resources staff using the classification system template developed by the PCG. The measures that were developed for the new system should make it easier to process these requests and ensure internal equity within the existing system.

Page | 28

130

Summary and Recommendations

Residency Requirement The City currently maintains a policy that requires employees to maintain a residence within fifteen (15) miles of the radius of the City. Failure to do so results in termination of employment. Although there is no research to show a definitive negative impact on compensation and recruitment of talent, there are studies* that indicate the following impacts of such a policy on recruitment and retention of talent:    

Skill sets that are in limited supply in the labor market (e.g., engineering, information technology, treatment plant operators) may be difficult to attract. Difficulties in attracting talent drives up compensation costs due to the need to offer higher offer rates as an incentive to consider the City as an employer of choice. Lack of an availability of qualified talent can cause the City to compromise and resort to employing less desirable skill sets to fulfill labor requirements. An increase in compensation to remain competitive in the market may not lead to higher productivity.

*”Economic Effects of Residency Laws on Municipal Police”; Hersch, Werner and Rufulo, Anthony, 1983. “Municipal Residency Requirement Laws and Their Impact On Cities”; Plerhoples, Christina, 2013.

Page | 29

131

Summary and Recommendations

Overtime Eligibility Standard practice during a Classification portion of a study is to conduct Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) tests on job classifications to determine whether they are eligible for overtime pay rights. These tests are outlined in the FLSA and were last revised by the Department of Labor and revisions made mandatory for all US employers effective August 23, 2004. Test documentation for all classifications determined to be exempt from the FLSA (ineligible for overtime pay rights) will be supplied to the City by PCG at the conclusion of the study. All US employers must comply with the FLSA. An employee’s rights under the law may not be negotiated away by either the organization or the employee. NOTE: On May 18, 2016, the United States Department of Labor (DOL) posted the final regulatory changes to the FLSA that will become effective December 1, 2016. The Consultant will use this new guidance when conducting exemption tests and will provide appropriate compliance documentation to the City.

Page | 30

132

Appendix A Classification Structure

Page | 31

133

CITY OF MESQUITE CLASSIFICATION & COMPENSATION STRUCTURE Technicians Grade T1 Engineering Technician

$33,647 - $42,059 - $50,471

Professionals Grade P1 Accountant Athletics & Leisure Associate Systems Administrator

$54,035 - $67,544 - $81,052

Grade P2 City Clerk Deputy City Attorney

$65,399 - $81,749 - $98,099

Grade P3 City Liaison Engineer

$69,125 - $86,406 - $103,687

Supervisors/Managers Grade M1 Manager Facilities Manager IT Manager Streets, Drainage & Fleet Services

Page | 32

$58,930 - $72,988 - $87,586

134

CITY OF MESQUITE CLASSIFICATION & COMPENSATION STRUCTURE Directors Grade D1 Director Athletics & Leisure Director Development Services Director Human Resources Director IT Director Public Works Treasurer/Director of Finance

$77,989 - $97,486 - $116,983

Legal Grade L1 City Attorney Municipal Judge

$92,378 - $115,472 - $138,566

Executives Grade E1 City Manager

Page | 33

$110,082 - $137,603 - $165,421

135

CITY OF MESQUITE CLASSIFICATION & COMPENSATION STRUCTURE Public Safety PS1 Fire & Rescue Chief Police Chief

$87,870 - $109,838 - $131,806

PS2 Deputy Fire & Rescue Chief Deputy Police Chief

$82,704 - $103,380 - $124,056

PS3 Police Captain

$68,372 - $85,465 - $102,558

PS4 Police Lieutenant

$62,276 - $77,845 - $93,414

Page | 34

136

Appendix B Compensation Survey Participants

Page | 35

137

Comparable Nevada Public Sector Employer Survey Participants

Municipalities Boulder City Carson City Elko Fallon Fernley

Page | 36

138

Appendix C Compensation Policies for Non-Represented Staff

Page | 37

139

Compensation Philosophy The City of Mesquite recognizes that providing efficient, effective and fiscally responsible service to the public is at the center of all that we do and that high standards and high expectations of all employees is essential to achieve established goals. The City commits to attracting, retaining and supporting the highest quality staff, which means our employees are recognized and rewarded appropriately for their contributions. In order to support the City’s top priorities, employee compensation must be externally competitive and internally equitable within the boundaries of financial feasibility. To ensure that our resources are used efficiently and effectively, we support a compensation system that is equitable, competitive and fiscally responsible: Equitable • Salaries for new employees should be established at levels that recognize the individual’s skills and experience while considering the salary levels of current employees within the same job title. • We will balance internal equity while recognizing the need for market competiveness. • We must ensure internal equity by paying employees similarly for comparable work within the parameters of discipline, function, and individual effectiveness. • The City determines individual employees’ compensation reflective of exceptional performance and outcomes as documented in performance reviews. Competitive • In order to support the public, the City must maintain a compensation program aimed at attracting, retaining and rewarding a highly qualified and diverse workforce. • We must strive to maintain a competitive position in the job market by setting salaries and benefits at levels competitive with other comparable jobs, fields and organizations in our various labor markets. • In order to continue attracting and retaining highly skilled and effective employees, the City must provide opportunities for growth and career development.

Page | 38

140

Fiscally responsible • The needs of the public require financial resources in addition to the support of our staff; therefore, the City must consider market variations, its fiscal status and the core beliefs of the City Council when determining employee compensation and our positions in labor negotiations. • The City strives to provide employees with a competitive total compensation package. That includes salary and benefits fiscally responsible for the City and in compliance with all applicable rules and laws, incorporating market variations, relevant labor markets, pay and benefits. The City will review the total compensation plan periodically to assess market competitiveness and effectiveness. Compensation Plan The salary for each non-represented employee covered by the City of Mesquite (City) COMPENSATION PLAN will be established and adjusted at the discretion of the City Manager and administered by the Human Resources Department. Annual adjustments to salary may be made at the discretion of the City Manager as per this Plan.

Page | 39

141

Salary Increases Annual salary increases shall be performance-based and link employee compensation to performance. Therefore, employee pay is differentiated by performance. The aim of this strategy is to encourage higher levels of performance and productivity and ultimately organizational effectiveness. Each year, the City Manager shall determine financial parameters, if any, relating to salary increases for Non-Represented employees. Salary increases shall include one (1) or both of the following:

1)

Increase to Base Salary – A percentage of the salary increase budget may be allotted for increases to employee base salaries. The amount of increase can be a flat dollar amount, a percentage of the midpoint of each pay range, or some other amount at the discretion of the City Manager.

2)

Performance Stipend – A portion of the salary increase budget may be used to create a pool that is distributed in accordance with employee performance. The award is determined as a percentage of the midpoint rate of the employee’s pay grade and awarded as a lump-sum stipend.

Page | 40

142

Setting Hiring Rates for New Employees In determining the starting rate of pay, consideration is given to: a) The candidate’s directly related job experience. b) Competitive labor market rates for individuals with comparable knowledge, skills, and experience. c) Recruitment and retention difficulty, to include the size of the qualified applicant pool and the duration of the recruitment process. d) Comparisons with other employees performing similar work in the unit, department or across the City. (Normally, the salary of a new employee should be no higher than the salaries of current staff in comparable positions with similar levels of experience and skills). e) Budget/funding availability. The Hiring Official meets with the Human Resources Director to review and assess the factors cited for the starting salary proposal. The Hiring Official will need to obtain pre-approval from the City Manager for any starting salary request above the midpoint of the range for the classification based on factors 1.a-d above. Example #1: A candidate is offered a Non-Represented position at the City. The candidate has a below average amount of experience (market average assumes journey-level amount of experience = 5 years). City decides to offer the individual a below market average salary as a starting wage closer to the range minimum. Example #2: A candidate is offered a Non-Represented position at the City. The candidate has an above average amount of experience (midpoint rate assumes journey-level amount of experience = 4 to 5 years). City decides to offer the individual an above market average salary as a starting wage closer to the midpoint. A guideline to follow is that 2.00 – 2.50% per year should be deducted from the midpoint rate for each year the incumbent is below directly related experience of five (5) years at that current job level. If the candidate just meets the minimum qualifications for the posted position, the salary offer should be close to the minimum for the range.

Page | 41

143

Promotions A promotion is defined as the change on an employee’s position to another position that has a higher salary range midpoint. Any increase to base salary is effective on the beginning of the pay period following the promotion/upward reclassification. The starting salary for an employee who is promoted shall be based on the same factors considered in hiring a new employee from outside the City. Typically a promotional appointment from one non-represented to another will result in a minimum of a 5.00% increase in base salary placement. The amount of increase is at the discretion of the City Manager. The starting salary of an employee who is promoted will not be less than the minimum rate for the range assigned to the new position. Demotions A Demotion is defined as the movement of an employee from one position to another that has a lower salary range midpoint. Upon demotion, an employee’s base salary will be established based upon: a) The employee’s directly related job experience. b) Comparison of proposed salary with salaries of other employee’s performing similar work. c) Reasons for the demotion (restructuring versus poor performance in higher position, etc.). The employee’s salary will not be placed higher than the salary range maximum rate for the classification to which the employee is being demoted and will typically result in a minimum of a five (5.00)% reduction in the employee’s current base salary rate. Exceptions to this may be made at the discretion of the City Manager.

Page | 42

144

Market Equity Adjustments A market equity adjustment occurs when the Human Resources Department determines that a job is either under- or over compensated in relation to comparable jobs in the relevant competitive labor market. A market equity adjustment is used to address salary inequities arising from external pressure in high demand fields or concerns related to the retention of key talent. These types of pay increases are not granted to reward individual performance. The Human Resources Department will conduct a competitive labor market analysis and forward the results and recommendations to the City Manager by February of the calendar year. The City may budget an annual pool to address market inequities based upon the report, areas of strategic importance, and available financial resources. Every year after performance based increases have been awarded, the Human Resources Department staff will recommend any required market equity increases based upon market analysis and available funding. The City Manager will review the analyses and approve increases at their discretion to address market inequities. Human Resources staff will meet with Department Head to inform them of increases in their area of jurisdiction. Letters will be delivered to affected employees informing them of the increase. The CFO will receive a summary of those increases for budget adjustment purposes. All increases to base pay will be made effective on the pay period following the award of annual base salary increases.

Page | 43

145

Internal Equity Adjustments An internal equity adjustment may be granted under unusual circumstances and is typically based on a serious salary inequity. A salary inequity exists when an employee’s salary is significantly below that of employees in the same classification in that unit/department who possess similar levels of performance, skills, knowledge, and job assignments. Examples of situations which may indicate a salary inequity with other employees in the same classification include: a) b) c)

The salary of a long-term employee is low relative to a new hire whose salary is highly market-driven. There is significant salary compression between a supervisor and their direct reports. Market factors influencing recruitment and retention.

The Human Resources Department will review and assess the factors cited for the salary issue. If a Department Head feels there is an internal inequity in their department, they should contact the Human Resources Director for a review. The Human Resources Director will confer with the Department Head and recommend remediation steps towards addressing the discrepancy. The Department Head will consult with Finance to ensure availability of funds. The Department Head will obtain approval from the City Manager. Acting Pay Employees assigned to a vacant Non-Represented position on an interim basis will be paid, in addition to their base salary, a five (5)% salary enhancement paid through bi-weekly paychecks. The exact amount shall be at the discretion of the City Manager. An acting assignment must be reviewed after six (6) months by the City Manager or their designee to determine whether the assignment will continue. Unless notified otherwise, acting pay is terminated the day before the start date that the position is filled.

Page | 44

146

+ Classification & Compensation Study Non-Represented Staff March 14,2017

147

+

Pontifex Consulting Group 

Created ten years ago by seasoned professionals



Experience as practitioners and consultants



Experience in public sector



Provide customized solutions based on client needs, resources and culture



Recent Nevada Clients: - City Fernley - Carson City - City North Las Vegas - City Henderson

2

- RTC - Douglas County - Lyon County - Storey County

148

+

Study Purpose 

Internal Equity – Objective method of determining internal worth, relationships and career paths



External Competitiveness - Benchmark against competitive labor markets



Process Equity - Provide means to update and maintain pay plan



Financially responsible

3

149

+

Study WAS NOT 

Efficiency Study



Cost-cutting Study

4

150

+

Study Tasks 

Determine & define work being performed



Develop classification structure(s)



Collect & analyze competitive labor market data



Develop new compensation plan recommendations



Create a maintenance process

5

151

+

Classification Study 

Each job was thoroughly reviewed to determine its current duties and responsibilities.



Jobs were classified into appropriate groupings of work.



Job descriptions reflect work being performed, minimum qualifications and legally mandated language/elements.



Consistent and professionally appropriate titling standards that are reflective of how the City utilizes job groups and the work being performed.

6

152

+

Compensation Analysis 

Identifying competitors for labor:



Employers who compete for same occupations/skills



Employers who compete within same geographic area



Employers who compete with same services

7

153

+

Compensation Study 

Validate organization’s competitive labor markets



Conduct a survey of public sector competitors



Utilize existing survey data for jobs with comparable private sector counterparts



Provide financial impact and implementation models

8

154

+

Comparable Agencies 

Boulder City



Carson City



Elko



Fallon



Fernley

9

155

+

Competitive Compensation Analysis

10

Compensation is considered competitive when it is within ±10% of the average pay practices of other comparable organizations, (the 50th percentile of the market).

156

+

Competitive Compensation Analysis

11

157

+

Salary Increase History

12

158

+

Maintenance of System 

Process & policies for new/revised jobs



Monitor markets



Avoid salary compression with other groups



Ensure internal and external integrity



Ensure adherence to philosophy and strategy



Ensure legal compliance

13

159

+

Recommendations 

Adopt new job descriptions



Implement pay ranges that are linked with competitive labor market



Update compensation policies and procedures

14

160

+

Final Result = Pay System 

Internal hierarchy of work



Competitiveness in relevant labor market



Valuation of work



Ability to be maintained/updated

15

161

City Council Agenda Item 9 Submitted by: Lindy Hulet Submitting Department: Fire and Rescue Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: Consideration to approve emergency recruitment and hiring of 2 Firefighter Paramedics. - Public Comment - Discussion and Possible Action Recommendation: Approval of emergency recruitment and hiring of 2 Firefighter Paramedics. Petitioner: Fire Chief, Kash Christopher Is this a budgeted item? No Fiscal Impact: The initial cost of salary and benefits is $208K for two Paramedics. The equipment and training cost (Uniforms, turnout gear, badging, training, equipment, radio, licensure) is $25K for both. The total initial cost for two FF/PM is $233K. The positions will not be filled until July 1st, 2017. The reason for the early request is to start the long process of recruitment hiring. We would like to be as thorough as possible. Background: I am requesting two additional Paramedics for Mesquite Fire Rescue (MFR). These paramedics will help offset the increased call volume MFR has experienced since 2010; a 38% increase in responses (1929 in 2010, 2872 in 2016) and with a loss of 25% in personnel in that same time frame (32 operational in 2010, 24 operational in 2016). Two of the operational firefighters in 2016 were the Fire and Deputy Chief. Contract Bid Expires On:

Attachments:  MFR Justification Letter - Personnel.pdf 162

March 1, 2017 TO: CC:

Mayor/Council Andy Barton, City Manager

FROM:

Kash Christopher, Chief, Mesquite Fire Rescue

Subject:

Personnel Request (Two Paramedic Positions) and Justification

Mayor/Council, I am requesting two additional Paramedics for Mesquite Fire Rescue (MFR). These paramedics will help offset the increased call volume MFR has experienced since 2010; a 38% increase in responses (1929 in 2010, 2872 in 2016) and with a loss of 25% in personnel in that same time frame (32 operational in 2010, 24 operational in 2016). Two of the operational firefighters in 2016 were the Fire and Deputy Chief. The new hires will respond to all medical, fire, and HAZMAT calls, prepare and manage correspondence, reports and documents, handle training requirements, be assigned extra duties to ensure MFR remains compliant with all State Fire Marshal and Southern Nevada Health District protocol and regulations, maintain databases, serve as a central point for disseminating inter-departmental communication, and coordinate the flow of information externally and internally with other emergency and public safety agencies. At present, MFR has three operational shifts operated with 22 personnel. The two additional paramedics will be assigned to the shifts manned with 7 personnel, thus evening the shifts to 8 full time firefighter/paramedics (24). The initial cost of salary and benefits is $208K for two Paramedics. The equipment and training cost (Uniforms, turnout gear, badging, training, equipment, radio, licensure) is $25K for both. The total initial cost for two FF/PM is $233K. The positions will not be filled until July 1st, 2017. The reason for the early request is to start the long process of recruitment hiring. We would like to be as thorough as possible. It is our hope that these positions will enable MFR to handle an increasing call volume without jeopardizing the safety of the residents, visitors, and most important, the first responders who have taken an oath to serve this city. Mesquite has shown no signs 163

of slowing down. I thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. If you have any questions, please feel to contact me at 702-419-5644 or email [email protected].

Kash Christopher, CFO Chief, Mesquite Fire Rescue Mesquite, Nevada

164

City Council Agenda Item 10 Submitted by: Gina Mendez Submitting Department: City Attorney Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: Consideration for Adoption of Bill No. 512 as Ordinance No.512 an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Mesquite, Nevada, amending Title 1 of the Mesquite Municipal Code “Administration” Chapter 11 “Personnel Policies” amending Section 2 “Purpose”; Section 7 “Adoption of personnel policies” and other matters properly related thereto. - Public Hearing - Discussion and Possible Action Recommendation: Adopt Bill 512 as Ordinance No.512 an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Mesquite, Nevada, amending Title 1 of the Mesquite Municipal Code “Administration” Chapter 11 “Personnel Policies” amending Section 2 “Purpose”; Section 7 “Adoption of personnel policies” and other matters properly related thereto. Petitioner: Gina Mendez, Human Resource Director, Andy Barton, City Manager, Bob Sweetin, City Attorney Is this a budgeted item? No Fiscal Impact: None Background: MMC Chapter 11 governs the creation, implementation and administration of personnel policies for the City of Mesquite. MMC 1-11-3 specifically keeps the power to amend or modify city ordinances with the Mesquite City Council. Further, the stated purpose of MMC Title 1, Chapter 11 is to allow the Mesquite City Council to "adopt personnel policies and to revise the personnel policies from time to time by resolution." Section 7(C) specifically adopts the personnel policies that were on file at the City Clerk's office at the time MMC 1-11 was adopted (October 13, 1998). Section 7(D) then specifically grants to the City Council the authority to amend those personnel policies by way of resolution of the city council. This method has proved unworkable as the City has renegotiated collective bargaining agreements, changes are made to Nevada Law, advancements are made in employment law and employee problems are discovered. The current process is overly-bureaucratic and prohibits human resources 165 and the City Manager from nimbly adapting to the needs of the City as an organization.

The proposed ordinance would still grant to the City Council the ability to govern personnel policy by way of ordinance. A prime example is the recent residency requirement. The City Council decided it wanted a residency requirement. It passed an ordinance requiring that all employees live within 15 minutes of the City of Mesquite, or Mesquite itself. The residency requirement is therefore immutably part of the personnel policy. Further, under the proposed ordinance, if the City Council does not like a policy promulgated by the manager, it can simply pass an ordinance or resolution specifically stating that such a policy may not be made against the employees of the City of Mesquite. Allowing the City Manager to fully control personnel policies, while maintaining the Council's ability to check and balance those policies through ordinance, would allow greater control and freedom to the City Manager while keeping day-to-day operational matters off the Council agenda. It would further allow for increased adaptability on the part of the City Management, which given the three major bargaining units (with sub-units), and rapid changes to Nevada law, is necessary and proper.

Contract Bid Expires On:

Attachments:  Bill 512 (1).docx  Chapter 11 Personnel Policies.pdf

166

BILL NO. 512 ORDINANCE NO. 512 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MESQUITE, NEVADA, AMENDING TITLE 1 OF THE MESQUITE MUNICIPAL CODE “ADMINISTRATION”; AMENDING CHAPTER 11 “PERSONNEL POLICIES”; AMENDING SECTION 2 “PURPOSE”; SECTION 7 ADOPTION OF PERSONNEL POLICIES” AND OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, Mesquite Municipal Code 1-7-5-4 grants the City Manager the power to be the administrative head of the City along with the authority to supervise and administer all city department heads and employees; and WHEREAS, the stated purpose of Mesquite Municipal Code 1-11-2 governing personnel policies explicitly states that the purpose of personnel policies is to govern the administration and management of the affairs of the city; and WHEREAS, notwithstanding the foregoing, Mesquite Municipal Code 1-11-2 vests the power to change, alter, add to or repeal provisions of the personnel policies solely with the City Council; and WHEREAS, Mesquite Municipal Code 1-11-3(C) specifically grants the council the right to amend Title 1, Chapter 11; and WHEREAS, to the end of proper and efficient management for the City of Mesquite, the City Council hereby finds that the City Manager, not the City Council, should supervise matters directly affecting the activities, rules and regulations related to City Employees, unless otherwise passed by specific ordinance of this City Council; and WHEREAS, the City of Mesquite has an interest in the efficient function of local government; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Mesquite, Nevada, does ordain: Section 1:

Mesquite Municipal Code Title 1, Chapter 11, Section 2 is hereby to read as follows:

1-11-2 PURPOSE: This chapter is enacted to provide for the administration of the personnel management affairs of the city. The purpose of this chapter is also to enable the City council Manager to adopt personnel policies for administration of personnel of the city, to be known as the Mesquite personnel policies (hereinafter referred to as the “personnel policies”) and to authorize the City council Manager to revise the personnel policies from time to time by resolution. Section 2:

Mesquite Municipal Code Title 1, Chapter 11, Section 7 is hereby to read as follows: 167

1-11-7 ADOPTION OF PERSONNEL POLICIES B. Administration: The personnel policies adopted by this chapter and thereafter by resolution of the city council by action of the City Manager in accordance with this chapter shall be administered by the city manager who is authorized to develop and adopt written procedures, forms, directives and interpretive memoranda consistent with the personnel policies and this chapter and to take other necessary administrative actions, including, but not limited to, the hiring and termination of employees and department heads, consistent with such policies and this chapter. D. Subsequent Revision of Mesquite Personnel Policies: The personnel policies which are approved and adopted by this chapter may be revised from time to time when such revision is necessary or advisable subject to the following requirements. 1. Provisions may be added, deleted or amended by resolution of the city council the City Manager without necessity of any new ordinance being adopted to implement such revisions; 2. Nothing in this section shall impede the City Council’s ability to override any personnel policy implemented by the City Manager by way of ordinance, which ordinance, unless otherwise stated, shall preempt the City Manager’s authority on that subject matter; and 3. Any Personnel policy adopted pursuant to this section shall be noticed to the City Council by placing the item on the City Council Agenda immediately following implementation of the policy under any such section allowing for City Manager comments or business. Section 3: All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. Section 4: The City Clerk is instructed and authorized to publish the title to this ordinance as provided by law. Section 5: This ordinance shall become effective upon passage, approval and publication. Section 6: The provisions of this ordinance shall be liberally construed to effectively carry out its purpose in the interest of the public health safety, welfare and convenience. Section 7: If any subsection, phrase, sentence or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deem a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions. Section 8: The City Council finds that this ordinance is not likely to impose a direct and significant economic burden upon a business or directly restrict the formation, operation or expansion of a business, and complies with Nevada Revised Statutes Chapter 237.

168

PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this ________day of ___________, 2017.

By: _________________________________ Allan S. Litman, Mayor

ATTEST:

By: _________________________________ Tracy E. Beck, City Clerk

AYE: NAY: ABSTAIN: PUBLICATION DATE: EFFECTIVE DATE: Approved as to Form: By: _________________________________ Robert D. Sweetin, City Attorney

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

City Council Agenda Item 11 Submitted by: Robert Sweetin Submitting Department: City Attorney Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: Consideration of Adoption of Bill No. 513 as Ordinance No.513 an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Mesquite, Nevada, amending Title 5 of the Mesquite Municipal Code “Police Regulations”; amending Chapter 1 “Misdemeanors”; adding Section 14 “Misuse or abuse of city property or services” and other matters properly related thereto. - Public Hearing - Discussion and Possible Action

Recommendation: Introduce Bill No. 513 as Ordinance No.513 an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Mesquite, Nevada, amending Title 5 of the Mesquite Municipal Code “Police Regulations”; amending Chapter 1 “Misdemeanors”; adding Section 14 “Misuse or abuse of city property or services” and other matters properly related thereto.

Petitioner: Bob Sweetin, City Attorney Is this a budgeted item? No Fiscal Impact: None Background: Currently NRS 207.245 governs the misuse of 911. A person who calls 911 and reports a nonexistent emergency or "accesses" an emergency phone system is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. As things stand there is an enforcement gap in the City of Mesquite where some calls are placed to dispatch that are not to report a fake emergency, but also not to report an actual emergency. Rather, at times, a caller to dispatch simply wants someone to talk to. Generally, these callers are either lonely or have mental health problems. The issue is that the callers are not reporting a non-existent emergency, and "access" does not mean the same as calling and therefore NRS 207.245 is not a valid criminal charge. As such, the Police Department has had no way to prevent or punish people 180

who call 911 to read jokes, share scriptural passages, or ramble about conspiracy theories (all actual examples). There is no way to completely prevent such activity. However, because Mesquite is reasonably-sized there are two unique and compelling reasons the proposed ordinance would assist emergency dispatchers. First, many of those who are placing these bothersome calls are known to the police and call frequently. Therefore, passage of the ordinance would allow for Police to cite the two or three most frequent offenders, thereby significantly reducing the instances of these calls. Second, Mesquite's dispatch department is suited to its needs. Because of good management and recruiting, Mesquite's emergency dispatch unit is well suited to the size of the community. However, our community does not necessitate a large number of dispatchers. The dispatch unit generally is serviced by two or three dispatchers at a time. The obvious consequence is that if two emergency calls come in at a time when a resident would like to read his daily scripture to dispatchers, it can create a significant risk to life for those engaged in actual emergencies.

Contract Bid Expires On:

Attachments:  Bill 513 Misuse of City Property or Services.doc

181

BILL NO. 513 ORDINANCE NO. 513 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MESQUITE, NEVADA, AMENDING TITLE 5 OF THE MESQUITE MUNICIPAL CODE “POLICE REGULATIONS”; AMENDING CHAPTER 1 “MISDEMEANORS”; ADDING SECTION 14 “MISUSE OR ABUSE OF CITY PROPERTY OR SERVICES” AND OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City Council has the responsibility to provide for the safety, health, and welfare of the citizens of the City of Mesquite; WHEREAS, Nevada Revised Statutes 266.105 authorizes the City Council to enact ordinances and orders that are not repugnant to the Constitutions of the United States or of the State of Nevada necessary for the municipal government and management of city affairs, for the executions of all powers vested in the city, and for the punishment for violations of such ordinances; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Mesquite, Nevada, does ordain: Section 1:

Mesquite Municipal Code Title 5, Chapter 1, Section 14 is hereby created and shall read as follows:

5-1-14 Misuse or Abuse of City Property or Emergency Services: A. Any person who shall misuse or abuse any emergency service, emergency communication service, or emergency resources provided by the City shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. B. For purposes of sub-section A of this section, “misuse or abuse” shall be afforded the ordinary and proper meaning generally attributed to those words and shall include, but shall not be limited to, repeatedly calling or communicating with the Police Department, the Fire Department, Emergency Dispatch, Animal Control or other such similar service, with no intent of reporting a bona fide on-going emergency, a safety hazard, or other similar dangerous situation. Section 2: All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

182

Section 3: The City Clerk is instructed and authorized to publish the title to this ordinance as provided by law. Section 4: This ordinance shall become effective upon passage, approval and publication. Section 5: The provisions of this ordinance shall be liberally construed to effectively carry out its purpose in the interest of the public health safety, welfare and convenience. Section 6: If any subsection, phrase, sentence or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions. Section 7: The City Council finds that this ordinance is not likely to impose a direct and significant economic burden upon a business or directly restrict the formation, operation or expansion of a business, and complies with Nevada Revised Statutes Chapter 237.

PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED this ___ day of ______, 2017. By: __________________________ Allan S. Litman, Mayor ATTEST: By: __________________________ Tracy Beck, City Clerk AYE: NAY: ABSTAIN: PUBLICATION DATE: EFFECTIVE DATE: Approved as to Form By: ____________________________ Robert D. Sweetin, City Attorney 183

184

City Council Agenda Item 12 Submitted by: Robert Sweetin Submitting Department: City Attorney Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: Consideration for the Introduction of a Bill 514 which will officially create the Virgin Valley Community Educational Advisory Board (CEAB) as noted in Resolution 914 approved on December 13, 2016. - Discussion and Possible Action

Recommendation: Approve the Introduction of Bill 514 and set a date for Public Hearing at the Regular City Council Meeting on Tuesday, March 28, 2017. Petitioner: Robert Sweetin, City Attorney Is this a budgeted item? No Fiscal Impact:

Background:

Contract Bid Expires On:

Attachments:  Resolution 914.pdf  Bill 514.docx

185

RESOLUTION NO. 914 A RESOLUTION OF THE MESQUITE CITY COUNCIL CREATING A COMMUNITY EDUCATION ADVISORY BOARD WHEREAS, the City of Mesquite is an incorporated City within the State of Nevada; and WHEREAS, during the 2015 legislative session the State of Nevada enacted Assembly Bill 394, providing for the reorganization of the Clark County School District; and WHEREAS, The Virgin Valley Community Education Advisory Board has existed for a number of years, operating under the supervision of the Clark County School District Board of Trustees; and WHEREAS, The Virgin Valley Community Education Advisory Board has been instrumental in allowing a forum for parents, community leaders, school administrators and students to work together to improve education in the Virgin Valley and respond to the community's unique needs; and WHEREAS, The State Board of Education adopted regulations pertaining to the reorganization of the Clark County School District pursuant to Section 28 of the Clark County School District Reorganization Act; and WHEREAS, Section 29 of the regulations promulgated by the State Board of Education requires that a CEAB be created by "the governing body of a city in which one or more local school precincts are located;" and WHEREAS, Under the regulations promulgated by the State Board of Education, there are four local school precincts located within the City of Mesquite; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City of Mesquite, after consultation with the current Community Education Advisory Board, to keep that board operating in the same or similar way in which it has been operating;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE Mesquite City Council hereby approves this Resolution No. 914 authorizing and creating the Virgin Valley Community Education Advisory Board (Virgin Valley CEAB), pursuant to the following requirements: Section 1: The City of Mesquite shall, within 90 days, establish an ordinance officially creating the Virgin Valley CEAB, and establishing its long-term structure; Section 2: This resolution shall not alter the current operational structure, activities or membership of the Virgin Valley CEAB;

186

Section 3: The Virgin Valley CEAB shall continue to follow its previously established bylaws, except for where applicable and practical, the term "Clark County School Board of Trustees" (or any term referring to that body) shall be replaced with "Mesquite City Council." Section 4: The duties of the Virgin Valley CEAB shall not be altered by this resolution. Section 5: Members of the Virgin Valley CEAB shall rely upon the resources of the City of Mesquite, rather than the resources of the Clark County School District for administrative and legal assistance, however, it is not a requirement that the Virgin Valley CEAB change the location of their meetings from Virgin Valley High School, unless the Virgin Valley CEAB wishes to do so. Section 6: The Mayor or the Mayor's designee chosen from among the City Council, shall have a voting seat on the Virgin Valley CEAB. Section 7: Nothing in this resolution shall prohibit the Virgin Valley CEAB from engaging in its normal course of business; rather, this resolution is passed with the intent of the Virgin Valley CEAB continuing to exist and serve the community. Approved this 13 th day Of December, 2016. ATTEST:

187

BILL NO. 514 ORDINANCE NO. 514 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MESQUITE, NEVADA, AMENDING TITLE 1 OF THE MESQUITE MUNICIPAL CODE “ADMINISTRATION”; CREATING CHAPTER 7A “ADVISORY BOARDS”; CREATING SECTION 1 “DEFINITION, ESTABLISHMENT OF BOARDS”; AND SECTION 2 “VIRGIN VALLEY COMMUNITY EDUCATION ADVISORY BOARD” AND OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, State Board of Education Regulation R142-16 grants the power to create community education advisory boards with incorporated cities; and WHEREAS, NRS 268.001 grants to the City Council the authority to take any action that is necessary or proper to address matters of local concern for the effective operation of city government; and WHEREAS, the Virgin Valley Community Education Advisory Board has existed for many years and provided a valuable service for communication between parents, teachers, school administrators, elected officials and the Clark County School District Central Office and the City; and WHEREAS, the Community Education Advisory Board is a valuable tool to allow for improvements to public education in the Virgin Valley; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Mesquite, Nevada, does ordain: Section 1:

Municipal Code Title 1, Chapter 7A “ADVISORY BOARDS” is hereby created.

1-7A-1 DEFINITION, ESTABLISHMENT OF BOARDS: For purposes of this chapter, “board” includes any permanent or temporary commission, board, committee, council, or trust created pursuant to state law, city ordinance, or city resolution. 1. The City Council may establish permanent or temporary boards to advise and make recommendations to the council on various programs and issues. 2. The provisions of this chapter apply only to members of boards appointed by the City Council who are not elected officials of the City.

188

1-7A-2 VIRGIN VALLEY COMMUNITY EDUCATION ADVISORY BOARD 1. Establishment. There is established, pursuant to City Ordinance No. 514, the Virgin Valley community Education Advisory Board. 2. Purpose. Pursuant to Assembly Bill 394 passed and adopted in the 2015 biennial session of the Nevada State Legislature and R142-16 adopted by the State Board of Education and made effective September 9, 2016, the purpose of the Community Education Advisory Board shall be to provide advice and assistance to the organizational team of any local school precinct and the Board of Trustees of the Clark County School District. Further, the Virgin Valley Community Education Advisory Board shall assist the Mesquite City Council in addressing the public education concerns in the Virgin Valley. 3. Membership. The Virgin Valley community Education Advisory Board shall consist of at least 5 members, four of whom are parents of children attending school full-time in the Virgin Valley. a.

Each school which services the City of Mesquite must be represented by at least one parent of a child who attends the school that that parent-board member represents. There shall be no requirement that any parent-board member be a resident of the City of Mesquite.

b.

At least one board member shall represent the Virgin Valley community atlarge. It is not a requirement that this board member either be a parent of a child enrolled in a Virgin Valley school or a resident of the City of Mesquite. However, such a member must be a resident of either the City of Mesquite or Bunkerville Township.

c. The Mayor may take a seat on the Virgin Valley community education Advisory Board, or appoint any person in his or her stead. d. Nothing in this section shall prohibit the Virgin Valley Community Education Advisory Board from adding additional seats or members according to the bylaws adopted under Section IV. 4. Meetings; Bylaws. The Virgin Valley community Education Advisory Board shall adopt bylaws establishing meeting times, membership, selection of members, and procedural rules necessary for the efficient conduct of its business. The Bylaws that exist at the time Ordinance No. 514 is passed shall be effective until amended. Section 2: All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. Section 3: The City Clerk is instructed and authorized to publish the title to this ordinance as provided by law. 189

Section 4: This ordinance shall become effective upon passage approval and publication. Section 5: The provisions of this ordinance shall be liberally construed to effectively carry out its purpose in the interest of the public health safety, welfare and convenience. Section 6: If any subsection, phrase, sentence or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such hold shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions. Section 7: The City Council finds that this ordinance is not likely to impose a direct and significant economic burden upon a business or directly restrict the formation, operation or expansion of a business, and complies with Nevada Revised Statutes Chapter 237.

PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this_________day of ___________, 2017.

By:______________________________________ Allan S. Litman, Mayor

ATTEST: By:______________________________________ Tracy E. Beck, City Clerk AYE: NAY: ABSTAIN: PUBLICATION DATE: EFFECTIVE DATE: Approved as to Form: By_______________________________________ Robert D. Sweetin, City Attorney

190

City Council Agenda Item Report Submitted by: Tracy Beck Submitting Department: City Manager Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: Public Comments Recommendation: Petitioner: Andy Barton, City Manager Is this a budgeted item? No Fiscal Impact:

Background: Contract Bid Expires On: Attachments: 

191

City Council Agenda Item Report Submitted by: Tracy Beck Submitting Department: City Manager Meeting Date: March 14, 2017

Subject: Adjournment Recommendation: Petitioner: Andy Barton, City Manager Is this a budgeted item? No Fiscal Impact:

Background: Contract Bid Expires On: Attachments: 

192