Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Water Resources topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Esmeralda County approves Goldfield water study and updates town water conservation plan; Klondike wellfield applications discussed

Esmeralda County Board of County Commissioners (combined meeting with Board of Fire Commissioners and Board of Highway Commission) · February 17, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board approved an $11,000 water capacity study for Goldfield and adopted an updated Goldfield Town Water Conservation Plan; staff briefed the board on Klondike Wellfield point-of-use applications and a public commenter reiterated that the county's POD application for Gold Point is a 'placeholder' not located on his property.

Adrian Roberts asked the board to approve a Goldfield Water Capacity Study to determine how many additional residential and small commercial water hookups the Goldfield system could support. The board approved the Shaw Engineering proposal, estimated at $11,000.

Roberts also presented the five-year update to the Goldfield Town Water Conservation Plan, noting required NRS citations and a minor correction to an original date. Commissioners approved the updated plan unanimously.

On water-rights administration, County Manager Joe Dunn briefed the board on three point-of-use change applications (#91493, #91494, #91495) for the Klondike Wellfield, explaining a small sliver of the applications lies in Nye County and that fees are paid. Dunn warned that the uses must be exercised or the county risks forfeiture of the rights; the board took no action but discussed the need to use the permits.

During public comment, Ralph Keyes again rebutted a prior meeting remark and said the Point of Diversion shown on application #89070 for Gold Point is a placeholder and not located on his property. Keyes asked that the record reflect the POD is not on his parcel and warned that claims otherwise are misleading.