During the public comment period, residents raised financial and legal concerns regarding several proposed charter amendments, specifically questioning measures that would mandate minimum public safety staffing levels or require a supermajority for tax approvals. Attendees also asked procedural questions about the prosecuting attorney's legal review process and the criteria for verifying initiative signatures. In response, commissioners clarified the county's evaluation procedures and strongly encouraged the public to continue providing input by directly contacting the sponsors of specific amendments.
Cross_cutting
Clark County Charter Review Commission Town Hall · May 23, 2026 · 1:07:39–1:07:48 · Watch on CVTV ↗
Keywords: public comment
What was said
1:06:34 for this particular forum that we're not gonna advocate for against a particular measure. I promise you we all have opinions on these specific amendments, but I think we're doing our best to stick to that. But if you email the sponsor of those amendments, they can boil it right down for you. They can tell you what they're trying to accomplish. They can answer your hard questions. Ask 'em hard questions. This is America. That's what we do. We petition our government. We complain about the government. It's in the Constitution. So I encourage you to do that. - That's a really good call out, Commissioner LeBaron. I think one of the joys of the town hall process is getting to have these questions, but the thing that I personally feel a little sad about is we haven't had a lot of those questions along the way, and it would be a very unfortunate thing if we got all the way through the process without anyone emailing one of the sponsors
1:07:32 of these amendments to say, hey, what's going on? What is this? I think we would benefit from your input, benefit from public comment. The process benefits from public input and comment. And so if there's one thing that you take away from today, 'cause I know that we've talked about a whole bunch of things in the process, and we've gotten into the weeds on specific proposals, but if there's one thing you take away from it, it's that please just email us, ask us these questions. We really want and need your comments, so. - I'll try to keep it quick since we all have a Saturday to get to, but just on the last one real quick, I do appreciate that, especially given the fact that none have qualified for the vote so far, so that makes sense. First read, thank you for putting that forward. Also on the direct democracy front, thinking about the fact that for someone to qualify themself for the ballot, or a candidate to qualify for the ballot, they need to get enough valid signatures to match each dollar it would cost
1:08:31 to register to be a candidate, and so one dollar per signature at this stage is extremely, extremely low, so that becomes a very difficult burden for a candidate or their volunteer committees, and I think that's been the price for a long, long time now, so just really quick on that.
Evidence (1 match)
cross_cutting keyword 1:07:39–1:07:48 public comment
ay, and it would be a very unfortunate thing if we got all the way through the process without anyone emailing one of the sponsors of these amendments to say, hey, what's going on? What is this? I think we would benefit from your input, benefit from public comment. The process benefits from public input and comment. And so if there's one thing that you take away from today, 'cause I know that we've talked about a whole bunch of things in the process, and we've gotten into the weeds on specific p