Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I would like to now call this evening's meeting of the Planning Commission to order. Before we begin, please note that this meeting is being video recorded and streamed live to the Internet. May I have a confirmation of posting and roll call? Chair Bogleman, the agenda has been posted according to the Nevada Open Meeting Law. All commissioners are present, and you have a quorum. Thank you. Will everyone please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge allegiance. of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Staff, are there any changes to the agenda? Yes, Mr. Chairman. The following memorandums have been included in the backup documentation. Item number three, auto haas memo adding an updated tentative map which adds required speed hump on Gold Hill Road. Item number 17, Johnny Max Water Street Tavern. There's a memo recommending amending condition number four for the applicant's request to clarify that if the applicant does not install the required mural within the specified timeframe, they may paint over the wall sign on the north elevation instead. The wall must be painted to match the existing paint color. The following public hearing items are being continued to a special planning commission meeting of August 20th, 2025 due to an error with the posting of the public hearing signs. Item number 10, Warm Springs and Boulder Plaza. Item number 11, Greenway and Van Wagenen. Item number 12, McDonald Highlands Neo Project. Item number 13, New Song Church expansion school. Item number 14, St. John Paul Roman Catholic Church. Item number 15, Henderson Sky Zone. Item number 16, Spa Haven. Item number 18, the falls at Lake Las Vegas, Lot G2. Item number 19, Lake Las Vegas Town Center. Item number 20, Sioux Residence Fence. Item number 21, Larson Bermuda, Lot 39. Item 22, Garage Shop Edition. And finally, item number 23, Monument and Calico Ridge, Chip Shots. Thank you. Based on the recommendation of staff in accordance with Planning Commission policy, it is the intention of the Planning Commission to make a motion to continue items as noted. For those of you who are unable to attend the meeting for which the item has been continued, please submit your written comments to Community Development and Services. Is there a motion to accept the agenda? I'll make a motion for approval. Motion's been made by Commissioner Lewis. Thank you. Please vote. That item passes. Our first item is a presentation on the East Henderson Desert Edge Study. I'd like to invite Calvin Ha from the City's Long Range Planning Department to the podium at this time. Thank you, Commissioner. Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Calvin Ha, and I'm a Long Range Planner with the City of Henderson. Today I want to share with you the East Henderson Desert Edge Study. And this plan is important because this plan was done entirely in-house with technical assistance from the National Park Services. Starting off with the vision, the vision was to preserve the desert edge landscapes that sustained the Mojave Desert ecosystem values while providing compatible benefits, including scenic vistas, protective floodplains, connection to nature, climate mitigation, and low impact recreation to the residents and visitors of Henderson. methodology for the project began with identifying the overall study area which was then subdivided using boundary lines and then from that point we had to identify the conservation value data and disturbance categories from that point on we had to process the data in which the city of Henderson conducted a few field surveys that included city staff and volunteers as part of this As part of this data set, we used data from the Nevada Division of Natural Heritage along with the Clark County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. We also collected data from the iNaturalist, both pre-survey and post-survey. On the right-hand side, you see an app that we created in-house where staff and volunteers were able to use this app on the field where they recorded observations that geolocated them given their time and date. In total, we had 1,613 data points, including 879 physical elements, 473 plants, 114 wildlife, and 167 cultural. The three main key species that we focused on in the East Henderson Desert Edge Study was the Mojave Desert Tortoise, the Las Vegas Bear Poppy, and the Desert Bighorn Sheep. There were 12 other species that were included as a significant role in the ecosystem of the East Henderson Desert Edge Study. We also took a look at invasive species that were found, including the Saharan mustard, the London rocket, the salt cedar tamarisk, and the oleander. We also saw that fountain grass was evident in the Lake Las Vegas and the old landfill in Three Kids Mine area. I meant to say Las Vegas wash, not Lake Las Vegas. Now jumping into the study area, it covers roughly 15,000 acres and is divided into four different areas. Starting from the south end going up to the north side, we have El Dorado Valley Annexation Edge. Next we have Railroad Pass Connection, River Mountains Edge, and Old Landfill and Three Kids Mine. On the left-hand side you have an ownership map which is made up of four different entities, one being BLM, The next one being BOR, the next being city of Henderson, and the last one being privately owned. On the right hand side, you see existing land use. Predominantly, we have low density residential in the middle with a few different land uses, including business and industry at the bottom. Starting off with area one, we have El Dorado Valley Annexation Edge, which is home to the highest peak now in Henderson, being 4,135 feet. Area two, being the smaller area for railroad pass connection, is actually the most active out of the four sub areas. Railroad Pass Connection also has a railroad pass casino and is the most active due to the fact that travelers have to go from Henderson to Boulder City using this area. Area three, River Mountains Edge, plays a significant role in the development of the Desert Bighorn Street population. It is a major migration and birthing ground for the desert bighorn sheep. And lastly, we have the area for old landfill and three kids mine. So this area was the most rich in biodiversity. And we think that is due to the adjacency to the Las Vegas wash itself. So when you look into the study, you'll see that this has the most flora and flora population. Then we have the disturbances, and on the right-hand side, you can see a disturbances heat map that shows some of the areas that disturbances were found. Some of the disturbances included infrastructure, so that could have been electrical power lines to gas lines, or it could have just been recreational or simple illegal dumping. From this study, we came up with six recommendations categories, the first one being urban buffer zone, and the overarching goal was to guide development to preserve ecological function, public access, scenic views, and soft transitions between the built and natural environment. Recommendation two was biodiversity and conservation, which is to protect and restore habitat to ensure long-term ecosystem health and species survival. Recommendation three for invasive species management, the overarching goal was to prevent the spread of invasive plants and reduce ecological and public health risks. Recommendation four was soil and land stewardship, The overarching goal was to protect soil integrity, maintain natural landscapes, and reduce habitat disruption across the East Henderson Desert Edge study. The fifth being sustainable water resources, and this is a typo. The actual overarching goal was to protect and restore natural water resources. And the final recommendation was climate adaption and resilience, which was to prepare the region to adapt to climate change by conserving resources, reducing risks, and integrating sustainable practices. So that was the entirety of the East Henderson Desert Edge study, and I'm open to having questions. Thank you very much, Calvin. Appreciate that. Does anybody have any questions on the commission? No? All right. Thank you for the presentation. Thank you. This brings us to the consent agenda consisting of items 2 through 5. Is there anyone here who wishes to have an item pulled from consent for discussion or public comment? Seeing no one, may we have a motion on consent agenda items two through five. I'll make a motion for approval to approve items two through five. Commissioner Humes made the motion. Please vote. Please vote yea or nay. I'll go ahead and vote for a yes. Is that a yea? Commissioner Grzmanowski's vote is yea. That item passes. Staff, please continue with unfinished business. Good afternoon, Chair Boekelman and Commissioners. Item number six is a request to vacate a portion of a road and utility easement generally located east of Mission Hills Drive and Plain Street. Staff recommends approval. This item will be heard at the September 2, 2025 City Council meeting. Do we have an applicant on this item? Thank you. Name and zip code for the record and whether or not you agree with staff's recommendations. Good afternoon, my name is Eric Hopkins. Zip code is 89119. I'm here on behalf of the applicant. I'm with Kimley Horn and Associates. So yeah, the vacation is pretty straightforward. There's an approved tentative map for this site already. And basically we're just processing this vacation application to support that approved tentative map. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you. At this time, I will open the public hearing. Is there anyone present that wishes to speak on this item? Seeing no, I want to close the public hearing. Commissioners, questions, comments, or a motion? I will move to approve VAC-2025-016919, subject to a finding of fact and conditions. Commissioner Brunson made the motion. Please vote. Commissioner Drisbanowskis voted yes. And that item passes. Thank you. Next item. Item number seven is a request to amend a master sign plan to relocate a previously approved 125 foot tall freestanding sign located at 1500 Railroad Pass Casino Road. Staff did not support the original request for the 125 foot tall sign and continues to oppose the proposed relocation closer to the freeway. The approved sign height significantly exceeds the 40 foot maximum height allowed under the established master sign plan and development code standards. Further, staff finds the relocation unnecessary as there are already ample signage both on site and off site identifying the development. Therefore, staff recommends denial This item will be final action unless appealed. Thank you. Name and zip code for the record, please. Mark Whitehouse 89014 representing the item. Tonight we come before you. First of all, thank you for your time. On Monday at the briefings, we were able to have a discussion about this. Building on those discussions, the sign was placed in the wrong position. Unfortunately, we did do some crane testing and some surveying to see if that location would be viable. Per those tests, it was not viable. I did bring along some photographs this evening to share, and I forwarded those over to staff earlier this week. The sign height is obviously still the same. We're not asking for anything there. We're just simply asking to move the sign closer to the highway so it is visible from both the northbound and southbound traffic. The sign will be 245 feet set back off the property line, which is a very significant setback. And I can field any questions you have at this time. Thank you. At this time, I'll open up to a public hearing. Anybody here wishing to speak on this item? Seeing no one, I'll close a public hearing. Commissioners, questions, comments? I'd like to see these new photographs. Are they in our backup documentation? Yes. Is this for the camera? I can see them on the camera. Right there is good. Can you help us understand what we're looking at? Yeah, yeah, yeah. If we can get zoom in on that a little bit. So I can start you. This is northbound traffic. You'll see the little black arrow. That's where the sign is at 125. Actually, the crane is at 140 feet there at the top of the crane. As I move closer to the exit, it's still in that position, which is unable to be seen. As I move closer yet, That's about 500 feet off of the ramp. Before I get to the ramp, I still am unable to see it. And this is at the ramp. On the southbound side, you cannot see it from this position, which is my furthest away. I'm probably 2,000 feet away from the ramp. Then you begin to see it. That little black rectangle you see vertically is actually the banner. The top of the banner is 125 feet. If you were able to zoom in on the photo closer, you could see the top of the crane is about 15 feet higher than that. And again, the southbound was not a big issue. There it is a little closer, as you could see. But you do see how far to the left of it is of the railroad pass sign. That's approximately 500 feet east of the railroad pass sign currently. And finally, that was the closest photograph that I took heading southbound. The issue is that from a northbound traffic, which is where we really need to have a decision made by a truck driver or a person using the travel plaza, it's unable to be seen at the top of the crane at 140 feet. Therefore, we're asking again to move it to the west, putting it in line with the Railroad Pass Casino sign. We've met with Joe DeSimone. He is in favor of the signage and felt like any signage on the site would help not only the travel center, but his business as well. It does not compete with that sign as it's offset from that sign. And we feel that the move closer to the street is warranted. And the sign retails at about $1.2 million to build. It's a significant investment, and it has a significant impact on the business of the travel center. And I have George Harris with me tonight who can further elaborate on that. Thank you, and thank you for meeting with us. We appreciate it. I'm sorry, name and zip code for the record. Oh, I'm sorry. I apologize. George Harris, 89118. Thank you. Thank you again for meeting with us. For us, this is all about economics, and for the city, it's all about economics. We pay about $410,000 a month in diesel fuel tax, and we believe this will increase anywhere between 11 and 14 percent of our business, which will just increase the amount of taxes we pay. And we think it's a win-win for all of us. So we would appreciate your support on this. Certainly, it being placed in the wrong place and how it happened is we discussed that during the thing. We apologize for that. But our goal is to be a good neighbor and to provide money for the city and for ourselves. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions or comments? Do you have the example, the pictures, the example, the last, when you were here in February? They were a part of the packet, and I can open that packet up with you. They were, this is our revised package, as you can see here. But if you look at these photographs, and if you zoom in, you can see that the cranes right back here, here. So what I did was, is I superimposed these new photos, because we didn't have the crane test at that point yet. But they're the exact same photos that we're in. We had showed kind of where the sign sits. Unfortunately, we didn't have a crane test done at that time, and I couldn't imagine that 125 foot wouldn't go over those mountains, but it did not. Once we found that the sign was in the wrong location where the owner had said that you guys have placed it in the wrong location, there's two things that work against you in that location. Large underground tanks that we cannot excavate or disturb the soil underneath, and then it's all roadway, ingress, egress for those different various businesses. And he had also said it's just too far back. It won't be able to be seen. So then we had to get a crane test done to kind of confirm logistically if he is correct. And unfortunately, those are the photos I showed you. It is correct. It's unable to be seen even at 140 feet on the northbound traffic. So the examples we saw in February We're estimated that we try to do the best we can as we do in the sign business to estimate them the best we can without having to go to too much of expense. To mobilize a crane out there was about $5,000 to get all that done. We were forced to do it once the owner was very upset with it being placed in the wrong location and getting approval. So we ate the expense and went out there and did the crane test. But it does unfortunately show that it would not be visible at 125 feet from that previously approved location. And nobody checked for the underground work before we got it? We were not aware where the tanks were located. We did not have a description with the construction department, the guys who do the fuel servicing and land the tanks. And it's just an error of communication between the various trades. It's kind of something that you're not really – You're not really there yet. You're not punching a hole in the ground with an auger bit or anything, so you're not super concerned about calling for dig clear at that point. But, you know, you're right, Commissioner. It should have been checked. You're 100% right about that, sir. Well, I think our decision the first time was that it was way over code on the height of the sign, and that's why we denied it. Now you're going to push it closer to the road, which makes it even more, I hate to say ugly, but because it's a beautiful sign, but it just, it's not great. Now my next question is, is the city council seen the sign that you're gonna put on there for leaving Henderson and welcome to Henderson? Have they seen it? They have seen it and we work with staff on that sign. So I originally had sent three different options of various heights and styles of the city of Henderson logo. And this was the direction the staff went. We're happy to do whatever y'all want, whatever staff wants. That's, you know, we're not charging for this work. We're giving it to the city, donating it. So if there's a better plan or something, Commissioner Beeson, that you would like to see that's more visible, we would love your input, and we can put that to work without question. Well, I see a million-dollar sign here, you say, right? 1.2. 1.2 million dollars. And if you look at the picture up in the top left corner, can you see the welcome or – or thank you for visiting Henderson sign? Agreed. I think it's meant more for the people traveling on those roadways that are right next to the railroad pass, casino, and travel center. But again, I agree with you. My first option was to have the city of Henderson logo right up underneath the Starbucks and the other sign, the 76 and Starbucks sign. My first rendition was to have the logo right there. So I'm with you 100%. And again, we'd be happy to put it there because I... I agree. I think it makes more sense there. But I had to share my options with staff and go off their direction. I don't even see why it's there because you can't see it. And it's only, give or take, 115 square foot sign. That's 115 square foot sign that you gave up so you could put it where you wanted to before. And that was the condition. Now you're back in front of us. And bottom line is our decision is based off of height. That's it. not where it's placed, not how it's placed, not what's on it. Ours is basically on code height. And you're so far over it that I think you should have taken the win from Council and moved on because I don't think it's going to pass this time either. So if there's no other questions... The only thing I would say is I do find this additional information compelling. And By all means, commissioners, vote your heart. But I'm reading the staff's report, specifically items C, D, and E. And they're saying that there's existing signs that adequately advertise. I'm looking at the pictures northbound and it doesn't appear that there are adequate signs. I'm looking at D and it indicates there's no significant changes in topography or development to warrant the relocation. Well, we've been told now that there's tanks that preclude the sign going where it was already approved by city council. And then I look at E and it talks about adequate visibility from all directions. And they just clearly demonstrated that you cannot see that sign at 140 feet. Again, knowing that every single case is heard independently and we're not setting any kind of precedent here, I think this property is unique. That's my feeling. And that's the direction I would go. But by all means, I want to hear from my other commissioners in that regard. I live in the area and I can appreciate what you're saying. I do agree. I always felt like the welcome to Henderson was not visible. Obviously, everyone here on the commission, we're giving of our time, our energies, our efforts. So I would like to see that improved. As a business owner and someone who travels that, I do agree. I do know that you're not falsifying your information with the balloon test. I knew I've known for a long time that you, you can't see your signage from the northbound traffic. Um, as I traveled to Boulder city almost every day. And so, um, I do think it is some compelling. I do like the fact that it's not setting a precedent, um, I do see your lots full, so I do know that right in and now you have competition that's going in into the area. I think it's a hope for the city that we grow the area as well, which is just an eventual thing. And so those are just my comments. And if I'd like to, if I could add, we would jump at the opportunity to work with staff to improve on that Welcome to Henderson sign. I live in Henderson. It's a growing, fantastic city, a great place to dive, raise my family here. And I'm proud of that. And we would be happy to work with staff again and kind of come up with a second rendition to raise that logo up high so it's very visible. I guess I kind of struggle between these two guys because this site's definitely challenging. I mean, there's significant topo over there. This is a road people are going 70 miles an hour long. So I'm kind of struggling. And so I could kind of, I don't, The welcome to Henderson sign is kind of a non-issue to me as far as is it appropriate here. But, yeah, I'm struggling with the height because we haven't seen something like that, but it is a weird, unusual sight with the topo. I've got a question. Yes, sir. The service station across the way. Yes, sir. What kind of signs do they have? The Eldorado Pass side has a, I believe it's a, I want to say. Not the Eldorado Pass side. Oh. A service station across the way. The one is set back off the freeway. Okay. So are you talking about west side? Yes. Okay, the petrol station? Yes. That's behind the Eldorado. They call that the Eldorado Pass Travel Center. So, yeah. So, there's a petrol station behind. They utilize the LED display to advertise their gas prices over there. That's a 76 combination petrol station. And that sign, I did not do that sign. I believe it's about 80 foot tall. And it has a massive LED display. And the other benefit to that one is being on the west, it's outside of any large impediments. Basically, just south of that, they've tore that hill down. That's a big excavated land at Mass now. And you could clearly see that sign from both directions with no issues at all. And if you could see ours from both from no issues, we wouldn't be here asking for such a big sign. We just want a sign that can be seen. And that's why we're asking to move closer to the street. They use the same exit that you do, right? Correct. OK, thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you. Anybody want to take a stab at a motion? I make a motion to deny MSP 2017-881142-A7. Commissioner Beeson made a motion. Please vote. Is that a yes to deny? It's a yes to deny. that item does not, the denial is approved, so the sign has been denied by the Planning Commission. Thank you very much for your time tonight. Thank you. Appreciate you. Item number eight is a petition to vacate a non-exclusive utility easement generally located east of the intersection of Kaya Canyon Way and Askaya Boulevard. Staff recommends approval. This item will be heard at the September 2, 2025 City Council meeting. Good evening. Name and zip code for the record, please. Michael Smith, 89074. I'm here on behalf of my client. They're performing an amended final map on the Askaya Canyon. The architect and the client decided to modify a couple of the buildings, removing an outdoor shower, which then will incorporated inside the square footage of the livable space of the building. So there's an NUE right in that little box. It's approximately 40 square feet on each building. And so this vacation vacates that interest so that we can extend the building over that area. Do you agree with staff's recommendation? Do you agree with staff's recommendation? Yes. Okay. Thank you. I'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Is there anyone here wishing to speak on this item? Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Commissioners? Comments, question, or a motion? I'll make a motion to approve VAC-2025-017-110, subject to a finding of fact and conditions. Commissioner Humes made the motion. Please vote. That and it passes. Thank you. Item number nine is a petition to vacate a portion of a public right of way Edgemont Drive west of Gold Hill Road. Staff recommends approval. This item will be heard at the September 2nd City Council meeting. Come on down. I need your name and zip code for the record, please. Good afternoon. Landon Christopherson, 89120, here representing the applicant. This is a companion of With the tenant map that was approved on item number three, it is vacating the portion of Edgemont west of Gold Hill. And I'm here to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. You agree with staff's recommendation? Yes, sir. OK, thank you. I'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Is there anyone wishing to speak on this item? Seeing no one, I'll close a public hearing. Commissioners, questions, comments, or a motion? Mr. McDonald? Yes, I'd like to make a motion to approve on VAC 202, 501, 6863, subject to findings and fact and conditions. Commissioner McDonald made a motion. Please vote. That item passes. Good luck. Items 10 through 16 have been continued to the August 20th Planning Commission meeting. Item number 17 is a request for a master sign plan with modifications for Johnny Mac's Water Street Tavern located at 115 and 117 South Water Street. The request includes two modifications from the development code to increase the maximum wall signage for the east elevation from 64 square feet to 80 square feet and increase the maximum wall signage for the north elevation from 89 square feet to 172 square feet. Staff finds that the painted signs effectively identify the business, provide clear directional guidance, and activate prominent facades on Water Street. In addition, the applicant is proposing to incorporate a mural on the north elevation that will be coordinated with community development staff. Staff recommends approval and notes that a memorandum accompanies this request. This item will be final action unless appealed. Commissioner Humes, you have a disclosure? My daughter, who is an artist, was offered a job to paint the mural the applicant, Johnny Max Water Street Tavern, has agreed to paint on the wall of its business in compliance with the conditions of approval for this master sign plan application, should it be approved. Because my daughter may have a financial interest in the outcome of this application, the independence of judgment of a reasonable person in my situation could be materially affected in considering this matter. Thus, I've been advised by Council to make this disclosure pursuant to the Nevada ethics laws and to abstain from deliberation and voting on this matter. Thank you. Applicant name and zip code for the record, please. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Michael Tassi, 218 Lead Street, along with John Marciano, 218 Lead Street. Good evening, Mr. Chairman. I just want the Commission to know that despite her father, What a remarkable young gal, and she is incredibly talented. So I think it's going to be really pretty neat if we can resolve the issue with the condition that your wonderful staff has messed up. So we did read the report. We agree with, we thank staff for the recommendation and working with us. We agree with all the conditions. However, we were handed this, the memo on the amendment to the condition number four, And after talking with staff, we would ask that you consider the portion of the memo that says applicant shall, comma, prior to the end of the three-month period, change that to applicant shall, comma, 60 days after the three-month period, paint over the wall sign. So we agree that we'll do the mural. We'll have 30 days to work on that mural. If it doesn't get done within that 30 days, then we have a little bit of time afterwards to paint over it and match the paint. That's all we ask. And with that, we'll answer any questions yet. Thank you. You agree with staff's recommendations and conditions beyond what you suggest? We do, yes. Okay, thank you very much. With that, I'll open the public hearing. Is there anyone here wishing to speak on this item? Yeah. I'm seeing no one. I'll close the public hearing. Commissioners? Yeah, I have a question. Who has got final approval on the actual drawing that's going on in the building? My understanding is that that will go to both Parks and Rec. They have a... AN ARTS MANAGER, SO MEG HARRIS IS HER NAME, SO WE'LL COORDINATE WITH HER AND REDEVELMENT ALONG WITH THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF TO ENSURE THAT APPROVAL. SO CITY OF HENDERSON? CORRECT. OKAY, THANK YOU. CAN I CLARIFY, YOU'RE REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT, THE WAY IT READS RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE 90 DAYS, THREE MONTHS, TO COMPLETE THE SIGN AND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT YOU WOULD REQUEST 90 DAYS TO EITHER start or not start the sign and that if you don't start it in 90 days you have then 30 additional days to repaint? We asked for 60 but that's essentially it. Yes, our plan is we have 30 days to get the approval for the sign from the city of Henderson. We have three months to paint the mural. If we don't paint the mural then we have time afterwards in order to paint the wall paint over the sign. after the 90 days. I'm getting the universal sign for that's okay with us from staff, so it sounds reasonable. We're perfectly fine with that. It's 90 days, not three months to paint the sign. Oh, there's no way to thank you, Mr. Rother. Thank you. Thank you so much. I'm sure he accepts that. Would you like to make a motion? Commissioners, without any other questions, I would make a motion to approve, unless you wanted to on this one, Rebecca. I would like to actually make the motion to approve. Please. All right. Motion to approve MSP-2025-017125, subject to findings of fact, conditions, and modifications. Just to be clear, that would include the changes to the memo as discussed? Yes. Okay. With the changes to the memo, okay. Commissioner Grishmanowski. Chris Minowskis, may the motion please vote. That and it passes. I look forward to seeing the mural. Thank you very much. Thank you. Items 18 through 23 have been continued to the August 20th Planning Commission meeting. Thank you. So that brings us to the public comment portion of this meeting. Items discussed under public comment cannot be acted upon at this meeting. Is there anyone here wishing to address the Commission? Seeing no one, I'll close the public comment section. Staff, do you have any? It feels weird not having, you know. No, I just want to thank the staff and the Planning Commission especially for coming back next week for our special meeting and for a second set of briefings and trainings. And we know you take a lot of time out of your days to be here with us, and we'll do it twice this month. So we'll see you next week. And again, we appreciate you taking the extra time with us this month. Right. And I appreciate the communication from staff. As difficult as it was to have 13 items postponed and pushed to another week, I'm sure it was quite challenging. Hopefully that doesn't happen again, but you never know. And all the folks that are always in the back of the room, thank you very much for your time. Those are the staff members that are hiding back there, which are thankful they don't have to come down and speak to us. But anyway, thank you for being here. And if there's nothing else, I'll go ahead and adjourn the meeting. Yeah, I'd like to make an additional comment and thank the city of Henderson for bringing actually taking the time to work this out, to spread it out, because it was pretty crazy. So thank you, City of Henderson. Okay. And I'll adjourn the meeting. Meeting's adjourned. I'm going to get my podium. This thing's all screwed up.