Agendas & Minutes


April 21, 2005

SPECIAL PAHRUMP TOWN BOARD MEETING
BOB RUUD COMMUNITY CENTER
150 NORTH HIGHWAY 160
THURSDAY – 8:30 A.M
APRIL 21, 2005

 


Agenda

1.    Call to order

A. Pledge of allegiance
B. Welcome

2. Public Comment (Acton may not be taken on matters considered during this period until specifically included on an agenda as an action item (NRS241.020(2)(C)(3).

3. Discussion, action and decision regarding recommendation of names to send to Governor Guinn concerning Town Board vacancy. Laurayne Murray/Paul Willis

4. Adjournment.


POSTED IN THE PAHRUMP TOWN OFFICE, COMMUNITY CENTER, COUNTY COMPLEX, FLOYD’S ACE HARDWARE AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE


SPECIAL NOTE: Any member of the public who is disabled and requires accommodations or assistance at this meeting is requested to notify the Pahrump Town Office in writing, or call 775-727-5107 prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices are available at Town Board meetings upon request.

 


Minutes

SPECIAL PAHRUMP TOWN BOARD MEETING
BOB RUUD COMMUNITY CENTER
150 NORTH HIGHWAY 160
THURSDAY – 8:30 A.M.
APRIL 21, 2005

MINUTES

PRESENT:
Richard Billman
Ed Bishop
Laurayne Murray
Paul Willis
Cristina Hinds, Attorney

CALL TO ORDER

Chairman Richard Billman called the meeting to order and led in the pledge of allegiance.  Mr. Billman welcomed all those in attendance.

PUBLIC  COMMENT

There was no public  comment at this time.

DISCUSSION, ACTION AND DECISION REGARDING RECOMMENDATION OF NAMES TO SEND TO GOVERNOR GUINN CONCERNING TOWN BOARD VACANCY  (This will be verbatim.)

Richard Billman:    I would ask that anybody who wants to speak on this that you keep your comments positive.  There is no reason for anybody to be negative.  We’re a community and let’s remember that.  Try and keep your comments to three minutes.  

Laurayne Murray:    Mr. Chairman.

Richard Billman:    Ms. Murray.

Laurayne Murray:    I move that we accept the recommendation of the screening committee for the Town Board to forward the following applicant names to Governor Kenneth Guinn for selection of an appointment to fill a vacancy on the Pahrump Town Board to complete the term as Town Board member until December 31, 2006.  The recommended names are Tanya Metaksa, Donald Rust, and Peggy Warner. Respectfully submitted Laurayne Murray and Paul Willis, April 9 2005.  

Richard Billman:    Is there a second to that?  Hearing none.  You couldn’t hear?  Could you read that again Ms. Murray, please.
Special Town Board Meeting
April 21, 2005

Laurayne Murray:    I move that the Town Board accept the recommendation of the selection committee that the Town Board forward the following applicant names to Governor Kenneth Guinn for selection of an appointee to fill a vacancy on the Pahrump Town Board to complete a term as Town Board member until December 31, 2006.  The recommended names are Tanya Metaksa, Donald Rust, and Peggy Warner, Respectfully submitted Laurayne Murray and Paul Willis, April 9 2005.  

Richard Billman:    Thank you.  Is there a second to the motion?  Hearing none the motion dies for lack of second.  Is there another motion from the floor?

Paul Willis:        Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Richard Billman:    Mr. Willis.

Paul Willis:        I make a motion to send one name and one name only, that being the name of Tanya Mataksa, to the Governor filling the vacancy on the Town Board and that the Board direct the Clerk to draft and send a letter and fax no later than 5:00 p.m. today to the Governor in this exact language.  “Dear Governor Kenny Guinn;  The Town Board of Pahrump respectfully requests you appoint Tanya Mataksa to the Town Board, to the Pahrump Town Board, ASAP to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Jeanna Howard.  Respectfully yours, The Pahrump Town Board.

Richard Billman:    Is there a second?

Ed Bishop:        Second.

Richard Billman:    Seconded by Mr. Bishop.  Comments from the Board?  From Staff?

Laurayne Murray:    I have comments.  

Richard Billman:    Yes, Ms. Murray.

Laurayne Murray:    I feel that given the process that we went through to implement something in semblance of a normal human resources hiring practice, which hasn’t been used in the past, that being to review all of the applications, to interview each of the applicants to determine the knowledge and experience of the people who are interested in being on the Town Board that it is appropriate that we use that process to make a selection, given that we are here to represent all of the citizens of the community, not a special interest group that there are many applicants that were very qualified.  I also feel that given the fact that not all of the Town Board members even had the time to review the applicants, being able to select a certain individual without knowing the qualifications or experience of other applicants that it is unfair to those people who applied for the position.  Are there Board members here who have had the level of experience to look at all the applications or to interview each and all of the people that were on there?  
Special Town Board Meeting
April 21, 2005

Richard Billman:    Well, speaking only for myself, I saw none of the applications, period.  One of the individuals that we would, that you discussing sending up, I have absolutely no knowledge of.  So, speaking for myself, certainly, no.

Laurayne Murray:    I just question the justification for making a selection without doing your due diligence in that process.

Paul Willis:        Mr. Chairman.

Richard Billman:    Mr. Willis

Paul Willis:        The motion was for the committee to bring three names toward the Board.  That’s what the committee did.  And then its as the pleasure of the Board to pick the three from that.  As far as the recommendation being three by the committee, there were three names by the committee but that wasn’t the recommendation of the single committee man.  The single committee man had an opinion of his own which he proffered to the Board.  The Board duly acknowledged it and voted on it.  You know, apparently there is some misinterpretation in the motion that I made at the last meeting and was voted on.  This went, there is nothing in the policy that dictates that we send three names to the Governor.  That was something you put in your, your questionnaire without my knowledge or approval.  Just because you said it doesn’t make it so.  So we, we went through the process, we did it as a committee, we brought the three names to the Board, the Board voted on one to send to the Governor.  And that is what we are here, to reaffirm what I originally motioned last week.  So, it’s the pleasure of the Board.  The policy says we can send from one to three to the Governor and that is what we voted to do at the last meeting I thought.

Richard Billman:    Okay, thank you Mr. Willis.  Is there any comments from any other Board members.  

Laurayne Murray:    Mr. Billman. Chairman.

Richard Billman:    Yes?

Lauryane Murray:    I believe that the clarification that I made at the meeting the last time, which is in the minutes, and I have a question to Mr. Willis that based on those minutes, which I believe you took the tape and made a request that the minutes be different than what they actually were on the tape.  

Paul Willis:        I did not request that they be different.  

Laurayne Murray:    That the verbage that I just read

Paul Willis:        I requested that my intentions and that my motion was interpreted.
Special Town Board Meeting
April 21, 2005

Laurayne Murray:    That the motion that I just read into the minutes of this meeting is verbatim of the document you signed, so I don’t understand the misinterpretation.  Yes the policy does allow us to send only one name or up to three names.  The Board has done both of those in the past and it isn’t the individuals that I have an issue with as far as the applicants are concerned.  As I said, the selection process was difficult because there were many qualified applicants.  The issue I have is with the fact that we did, in fact, follow a process.  We did go through the interviews and the interviewing.  There are qualified applicants that I believe all deserve consideration and for this Board, with no knowledge of several of the applicants, to select just one, I’d like to know the justification if it is a personal commitment to a particular individual, what reason would they have for that.  

Richard Billman:    Okay, thank you.

Paul Willis:        Well I’d like to disagree with

Richard Billman:    Mr. Willis, this is what I don’t want to do is to go back and forth so.  I think the two of you have both stated your positions.  If Mr. Bishop has anything to say.  No?  I’m going to open it to the public comment and I’m going to allow five people, three minutes apiece, if that’s alright.  

Paula Glidden:        Good morning Chairman.  Good morning Board.  Good morning Staff.  Paul Glidden.  In the past it’s been handled either way, I know that.  You can either send up one name or you can send up three names.  The point being is, the other night at the meeting, Mr. Willis, it was really clear the way the motion was stated and agreed upon.  And I find it weird that we are even here this morning and re-looking at a motion that was very clear and stated and well prepared.  So, my question is, is this just a ramrod situation where you want to do things your way and we’re going to revote on everything that the Board has done in the past or will in the future., every time something is unclear to you.  And, another thing is that I’m just questioning what did we do with the tape?  

Paul Willis:        The tapes right there.

Paula Glidden:        Okay, so I mean I don’t understand why you were going to do anything with the tape.  Was that just…

Richard Billman:    If I could, I guess I have to ask the Town Attorney to comment if I can.  

Cristina Hinds:    If I could, when I went back, Cookie prepared a set of minutes as she always does that are a condensed version of minutes; which is completely fine under the Open Meeting Law.  I requested, she also prepared a verbatim set of minutes from the tape.  When I looked at the verbatim set of minutes there were some voting irregularities.  For example, what happened is if you read the verbatim minutes the Chairman called for the, all the votes in favor.  They didn’t call for the no votes; closed the voting after the three people voted in favor of it.  Ms.
Special Town Board Meeting
April 21, 2005

Murray, at that point voting was still open, when she asked for clarification; the voting was actually still open.  It hadn’t closed yet because the no votes hadn’t been called for.  So it was just an irregularity under Roberts Rules of Order.  I was concerned and I didn’t want to put this on the record that if somebody did file a complaint of the open meeting law, under the open meeting law, I was concerned that if it went up to the Attorney General, the Attorney General would have the same problems that I had in that there were two different positions on what occurred.  Clearly there was an irregularity and then order re-voting which would have been the remedy.  I thought that would be problematic cause that would occur two or three months down the road after somebody had already been appointed.   So, it was just a matter of looking at the verbatim minutes, I never heard the tape, but looking at the verbatim minutes though, they weren’t the minutes.  The minutes haven’t been voted on, but the verbatim minutes clearly, there are irregularities that I felt that if it went up to the Attorney General they would have ordered a revote.  Just because for example the voting actually closed prior to the time that Ms. Murray had the opportunity to vote and was clarified actually while voting was still open, but clarified incorrectly and didn’t actually summarize Mr. Willis’ position.  

Paula Glidden:        Well I was at that meeting and I heard it pretty clear that the way the motion was, and it was restated by Ms. Murray.  So I just wonder why the confusion now.

Paul Willis:        That’s incorrect.  

Paula Glidden:        How is that Mr. Willis.  

Paul Willis:        It was not restated by Ms. Murray.  What…

Richard Billman:    The motion was actually made by Mr. Willis.  Probably my fault.  I misheard Mr. Willis.  I clarified to Ms. Murray what I thought I’d heard and that was that we were sending up three names and recommending one.  

Laurayne Murray:    And you voted aye.

Paula Glidden:        That’s what I heard

Richard Billman:    And I voted aye.

Paul Glidden:        That’s what I heard and that’s what everyone agreed to I thought.    

Paul Willis:        That wasn’t the motion and that’s not what everybody heard.

Richard Billman:    But…

Paul Willis:        The people that wanted to hear it that way heard it that way.  I made a motion for the Board to accept, for the Board to accept those three names and to send one name,
Special Town Board Meeting
April 21, 2005

I didn’t specific, but to sent Tanya Metaksa’s name to the Governor.  I accepted, I voted to accept, made a motion for the Board accept those three names as a body excepting at as a form of protocol and sending one name up to the Governor.  Accepting, accepting, there’s two different things Paula.  Accept, the Board accepting those names and then the motion to send up, and then sending up a name are two different things.  

Richard Bllman:    Mr. Willis, thank you.  I don’t want to get into an argument.

Paula Glidden:        Well I think you are getting it more confusion, but thank you Chairman.

Richard Billman:    And yes, you can blame me for that one.

ED BISHOP LEFT THE STAGE AT THIS TIME.

Loyal Watkins:    Good morning ladies and gentlemen, and there is no sense in raising your voice.  We’re here as, as to be calm.  My name is Loyal Watkins.  And Ms. Murray, if I understood you correctly, Mr. Willis asked someone to change the way the minutes read.  Is that correct?

Laurayne Murray:    No, I just asked him if he had done that, and he said he did not.  

Paul Willis:        No, that was your allegation. And Cookie, did I ask you to change minutes, no.

Cookie Westphal:    Yes you did.

Paul Willis:        No, I did not.

Cookie Westphal:    You asked me to change the minutes.  

Loyal Watkins:    Well my question is, if this was done, isn’t that unethical for a Town Board member to be representing all of us out here to try and change things the way that he wants it read.  Is that unethical or not?

Paul Willis:        No, I didn’t want the Clerk

Loyal Watkins:    Can the Chairman answer that please?  Thank you.

Richard Billman:    Let’s try and address the comments to the Chair and the Chair will address whomever.  It, I don’t know the circumstances to be honest Loyal.  I wasn’t there.  I only know that there was an argument over what the minutes said.  And I don’t believe that was the written minutes or the recorded minutes.  I just don’t know.  All of that aside, what we are here to do is

Special Town Board Meeting
April 21, 2005

to send a name or names up to the Governor and if the clarification at the last meeting, you know, I will take the blame for that one.

Loyal Watkins:    Myself, I know nothing of it either until Ms. Murray saying this.  And if this is true, I think this might have some kind of impact on what we are trying to do this morning and if this is true, and I will try to research it, and find out if it is true, well I want to do something about it because we, or you guys as the Town Board, if you ever try to do anything like this, my goodness.  This is, this is not right.

Richard Billman:    No. And, I, well I really do not believe that anybody on this Board would attempt to alter, change.

Loyal Watkins:    Well, I would hope not.  And in my opinion I wish you would send three names instead of one.  Thank you.

Richard Billman:    Thank you Loyal.

Cristina Hinds:    And regardless of the minutes we do have the verbatim minutes now which I would recommend that you simply use the verbatim minutes at this time when you ultimately.

Paul Willis:        Mr. Chairman, I just want to clarify on thing.  I did not ask to change any minutes.  I just asked for the Clerk and for the Secretary not to interpret what I said.  To interpret it to the strict meaning of what I intended.  Not what they intended.  

Richard Billman:    Okay.  And I can understand that we can have a question about what each one of you meant.  So, no faults.    Please.

Cora Bishop:        Cora Bishop.  Why doesn’t Paul just make the motion that he made at the last meeting and just be done with it.  And vote on that motion.

Richard Billman:    He has made the motion and it was seconded by Mr. Bishop.  At this point that is the motion under discussion.  Is there any further comment by anyone?

Laurayne Murray:    I’d just like to comment on the position that the Town Attorney just stated for us.  That the clarity I made at the last meeting which I said “send three names and only recommend one”, which you confirmed that that was your understanding and at that, with that understanding, your vote was nay.  And now you’re not supporting sending three names.  So I just want to go on the record of asking what is it that has influenced your decision between that vote and this vote to not support sending three names.  

Richard Billman:    It’s not a question of not one, not the other.  Mr. Willis has made this motion.
Special Town Board Meeting
April 21, 2005

Paul Willis:        Point of Order Mr. Chairman

Richard Billman:    And this is the motion under consideration.  So

Laurayne Murray:    So your position has changed?

Richard Billman:    My position is the same always.

Paul Willis:        Point of order Mr. Chairman.

Richard Billman:    Yes, Mr. Willis.

Paul Willis:        Since that agenda item was ruled flawed, then it doesn’t exist.  Am I right or am I wrong?

Cristina Hinds:    That’s correct.

Paul Willis:        Okay.  So this is square one.

Richard Billman:    So we’re starting over.

Paul Willis:        Yes.

Richard Billman:    Cora, is Ed okay?  I’m going to call for the vote as soon as Ed.

Cora Bishop:        He’ll be right.

Richard Billman:    Okay Cora.

The vote was delayed until Mr. Bishop returned from the restroom. (after two minutes)

Richard Billman:    Cookie one, one or two things if I could just ask you.  Is it possible in the future to record, not just the ayes and nays, but who the ayes were on the minutes and who the nays were?

Cookie Westphal:    The Open Meeting Law requires that if there is other than a unanimous vote, you must always list what the opposer voted, and that is always been reflected in the minutes.  

Richard Billman:    Well I just noticed it will say 3 ayes, the motion carries 3 ayes and 2 nays but it doesn’t indicate…

Cookie Westphal:    It always reflects who the nays were in detail.
Special Town Board Meeting
April 21, 2005

Richard Billman:    It does?

Cookie Westphal:    The ayes would be explained by who was present which is always listed at the beginning of the minutes of who was present.  So anyone not listed at voting nay would be listed there.

Richard Billman:    Okay.

ED BISHOP RETURNED TO THE STAGE AT THIS TIME.

Richard Billman:    You’re all right Ed?

            I’d like to call for the question.  Cookie can you repeat back the motion.

Cookie Westphal:    Mr. Willis has it in writing.

Richard Billman:    Mr. Willis why don’t you, why don’t you reread your motion.

Paul Willis:        Okay.  I make a motion to send one name and one name only that being the name of Tanya Metaksa’s to the Governor filling the vacancy on the Town Board and that the Board direct the Clerk to draft and send a letter and fax no later than 5:00 p.m. to the Governor in this exact language.  Dear Governor Kenny Guinn;  the Town Board of Pahrump respectfully requests that you appoint Tanya Mataksa to the Pahrump Town Board ASAP to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Jeanna Howard, respectfully yours, The Pahrump Town Board.  

Richard Billman:    Thank you.  You’ve heard the motion as stated.  All those in favor of the motion please state aye.

Ed Bishop:        Aye
Paul Willis:        Aye
Richard Billman:    Aye

Richard Billman:    Opposed?

Laurayne Murray:    Nay

Richard Billman:    Thank you.  The motion carries.





Special Town Board Meeting
April 21, 2005

ADJOURNMENT

Richard Billman:    The meeting is adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,


Laurayne Murray



cc:    Town Clerk                            
    Cristina Hinds
Nye County Treasurer                        
Dan McArthur                
Town Board                    
    Nye County Planning            
    Nye County Commissioners            
            Nye County Clerk

/cw
 

 


 

Special Town Board Meeting
(excerpt minutes)
April 21, 2005


Paul Willis Motioned to send one name and one name only, that being the name of Tanya Metaksa filling the vacancy on the Town Board and that the Town Board direct the Clerk to draft and send a letter and fax no later than 5:00 p.m. today, to the Governor in this exact language.  Dear Governor Kenny Guinn;  The Town Board of Pahrump respectfully requests you appoint Tanya Mataksa to the Town Board, to the Pahrump Town Board ASAP to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Jeanna Howard.  Respectfully yours,  The Pahrump Town Board.  Motioned was seconded by Ed Bishop.  

Laurayne Murray commented that she feels, given the process that the selection committee went through to implement something in the assemblance of a normal human resources hiring practice, which has not been used in the past.  That being to review all of the applications, to interview each of the applicants to determine the knowledge and experience of the people that are interested in being on the Town Board that it is appropriate that we use that process to make a selection given that the Board is there to represent all of the citizens of the community, not a special interest group, that there are many applicants that were very qualified.  Ms. Murray said she also feels that given the fact that not all of the Town Board members even had the time to review the applicants, being able to select a certain individual without knowing the qualifications or experience of other applicants that it is unfair to those people who applied for the position.  Lauryane Murray asked if there were Board members that have had the level of experience to look at all the applications or to interview each and all of the people that were on there.  

Richard Billman, speaking only for himself, replied stated that he saw none of the applications.  One of the individuals you were discussing sending up, he has absolutely no knowledge of.  Mr. Billman said speaking for himself, no.  

Ms. Murray questioned justification for making a selection without doing due diligence in that process.  

Paul Willis stated that the motion was for the committee to bring three names toward the Board.  That is what the committee did.  And then it is at the pleasure of the Board to pick the three from that.  As far as the recommendation being three by the committee, there were three names by the committee, but that was not the recommendation of the single committee man.  The single committee man had an opinion of his own which he proffered to the Board.  The Board duly acknowledged it and voted on it.  Mr. Willis said that apparently there is some misinterpretation in the motion he made at the last meeting and was voted on.  There is nothing in the policy that dictates that we send three names to the Governor.  That was something that you put in your questionnaire without my knowledge or approval.  Just because you said it does not make it so.  So we went through the process, we did it as a committee, we brought the three names to the Board, the Board voted on one to send to the Governor.  That is what we are here for; to reaffirm what I originally motioned last week.  Mr. Willis said it was the pleasure of the Board.  The policy says we can send from one to three to the Governor and that is what we voted to do at the last meeting I thought.  

Laurayne Murray stated that she believes that the clarification that she made at the meeting last time, which is in the minutes and she has a question to Mr. Willis that based on those minutes, which she believes he took that tape, and made a request that the minutes be different than what they actually were on the tape.  

Paul Willis said he did not request that they be different.  Laurayne Murray continued saying that the verbiage that she just read into.   Ms. Murray was interrupted by Mr. Willis who said he requested that his intentions, and that his motion was not interpreted.  Ms. Murray continued that her motion that was read into the minutes of this meeting is verbatim of the document that Mr. Willis signed.  Lauryane Murray said she does not understand the misinterpretation.  Yes the policy does allow us to send only one name or up to three names.  The Board has done both of those in the past.  It is not the individuals that she has an issue with, as far as the applicants are concerned.  As Ms. Murray stated, the selection process was difficult because there were many qualified applicants.  The issue Ms. Murray stated is with the fact that they did follow a process, we did go through the interviews and interviewing, there are qualified applicants that she believes all deserve consideration.  Laurayne Murray said that with this Board, with no knowledge of several of the applicants to select just one, she would like to know the justification if it is a personal commitment to a particular individual, what reason they would have for that.  

Richard Billman commented that what he does not want is to go back and forth.  It appears that the two (Laurayne Murray and Paul Willis) both stated their positions.  Mr. Billman asked if Mr. Bishop had anything to say.  There was no response heard.  Richard Billman opened the discussion to public comment.  Mr. Billman said he would allow five people, three minutes apiece and asked if that was alright.

There were comments made by Paula Glidden which concerned the tape of the meeting.

Cristina Hinds replied that a set of minutes were prepared as is always done, which is a condensed version of minutes.  This is fine under the Open Meeting Law.  Ms. Hinds said a set of verbatim minutes were prepared from the tape.  Ms. Hines stated that when looking at the verbatim set of minutes there were some voting irregularities.  If you read the verbatim minutes the Chairman called for all the votes in favor, did not call for the nay votes, closed the voting after the three people voted in favor of it.  Ms. Murray, at that point voting was still open and she asked for clarification, the voting was still open.  It had not closed yet because the no votes had not been called for.  It was a irregularity under Roberts Rules of Order.  Ms. Hinds said she was concerned, and did not want it on the record that if somebody did file a complaint under the Open Meeting Law, that if it went to the Attorney General, the Attorney General would have the same problem she had in that there were two different positions on what occurred.  Cristina Hinds stated that clearly, there was an irregularity and order re-voting which would have been the remedy.  This would be problematic because that would occur two or three months down the road after somebody had already been appointed.  It was just a matter of looking at the verbatim minutes, she never heard the tape, and there are irregularities that if it went to the Attorney General they would have ordered a revote.  The voting actually closed prior to the time that Ms. Murray had the opportunity to vote, and was clarified while voting was still open, but clarified incorrectly and did not actually summarize Mr. Willis’ position.  

Ms. Glidden said she was present at the meeting and said she heard the motion pretty clear and the motion was restated by Ms. Murray.  Ms. Glidden asked why there was confusion.

Paul Willis stated that was incorrect.  It was not restated by Ms. Murray.  Richard Billman said that the motion was made by Mr. Willis.  Richard Billman said it was probably his fault.  He misheard Mr. Willis.  Mr. Billman said he clarified to Ms. Murray what he thought he had heard and that was that we were sending up three names and recommending one.  Paula Glidden agreed that is what she heard and that was what everyone agreed to she thought.  Paul Willis said that was not the motion and that is not what everybody heard.  Mr. Willis said that people that wanted to hear it that way heard it that way.  Mr. Willis said he made a motion for the Board to accept those three names and to send one name, not specifying, but to send Tanya Mataksa’s name to the Governor.  Paul Willis said he accepted, he voted to accept, made a motion for the Board to accept those three names as a body accepting it as a formal protocol, and sending one name up to the Governor.  Mr. Willis repeated, accepting.  Paul Willis said there are two different things, the Board accepting those names and then the motion to send up a name are two different things.  

Ed Bishop left the stage at this time.

Loyal Watkins asked Ms. Murray if she had stated that Mr. Willis asked someone to change the way the minutes read.  Ms. Murray said she asked Mr. Willis if he had done that and his reply was that he had not.  

Paul Willis commented that it was Ms. Murray’s allegation.  Mr. Willis asked Ms. Westphal if he asked her to change the minutes.  No.  Ms. Westphal replied yes he did.  Paul Willis said he did not.  

Mr. Watkins asked if this was done, is it not unethical for a Town Board member to be representing all of the community to try to change things the way he wants it read.

Richard Billman asked that questions be addressed to the Chairman and he will address whomever.  Mr. Billman said he did not know the circumstances.  He only knows there was an argument over what the minutes said and is not sure if it was in the written minutes or the recorded minutes.  With all that aside, Mr. Billman commented that what we are here to do is to send a name or name to the Governor.  If the clarification at the last meeting, he will take the blame for that one.  

Mr. Watkins asked that the Board consider sending three names and not one.

Cristina Hinds noted that regardless of the minutes, we have the verbatim minutes which she would recommend use the verbatim minutes at this time.  

Paul Willis asked to clarify that he did not ask to change any minutes.  He asked for the Clerk and for the Secretary not to interpret what he said.  To interpret it to the strict meaning of what he intended.  Not what they intended.  Richard Billman said he understands there could be a question of what each one meant.  No faults.  

Cora Bishop asked if Paul Willis could make the motion he made at the last meeting and be done with it by voting on it.

Richard Billman replied that Mr. Willis has made a motion and was seconded by Mr. Bishop.  At this point, that is the motion under discussion.  

Lauryane Murray commented on the position stated by the Town Attorney, that the clarity made by Ms. Murray at the last meeting by stating “send three names and only recommend one” which was confirmed by Mr. Billman as his understanding and with that understanding your vote was aye, and not you are not supporting sending three names.  Ms. Murray asked Mr. Billman what is it that has influenced your decision between that vote and this vote to not support sending three names.  

Mr. Billman said it is not a question of not one, not the other.  Richard Billman said the Mr. Willis has made this motion.

Paul Willis called a point of order.

Mr. Billman noted that this is the motion under consideration.  Lauryane Murray confirmed that Richard Billman’s position has changed.   Richard Billman replied his position is the same as always.  

Paul Willis called a point of order.

Mr. Willis stated that since the agenda item was ruled flawed, then it does not exist.  Am I right or am I wrong, Mr. Willis asked.  

Cristina Hinds replied that to be correct.

Paul Willis stated so this is square one.   Richard Billman said we are starting over.

Mr. Billman called for the vote.  

Ed Bishop was still not on stage for the vote.

Richard Billman asked Ms. Westphal if it is possible in the future to record not just the ayes and nays, but who the ayes were on the minutes and who the nays were.  Ms. Westphal replied that the Open Meeting Law requires that if there is anything other than a unanimous vote that those voting in opposition be named and has always been reflected in the minutes.  Mr. Billman said he sometimes has noticed votes stating motion carries 3 ayes and 2 nays, but does not indicate who voted.  Ms. Westphal said the minutes will always reflect who voted nay and the ayes would be obvious by those present which is listed at the beginning of the minutes.  Anyone not listed as voting nay would be the obvious aye votes.

Ed Bishop returned to the stage.

Richard Billman called for the question and asked that the motion be repeated.  

Paul Willis repeated, “I make a motion to send one name, and one name only, that being the name of Tanya Metaksa to the Governor filling the vacancy on the Town Board and that the Board direct the Clerk to draft and send a letter and fax no later than 5:00 p.m. today to the Governor in this exact language.  Dear Governor Kenny Guinn; The Town Board of Pahrump respectfully requests that you appoint Tanya Metaksa to the Pahrump Town Board ASAP to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Jeanna Howard.  Respectfully yours, The Pahrump Town Board.”

Richard Billman said that the Board has heard the motion as stated.  All those in favor of the motion please state aye.

Ed Bishop, Paul Willis, and Richard Billman voted aye.  

Richard Billman asked for opposing votes.

Lauryane Murray voted nay.

Vote passed 3 – 1.  

ADJOURNMENT

Richard Billman called the meeting adjourned.



 

 


Backup

There is no backup posted for this meeting.