Clark County Today is taking a brief look at each of the 10 amendments that the Clark County Charter Review Commission passed in expectation of bringing them to the November 2026 General Election

Paul Valencia
Clark County Today

Last week, the Clark County Charter Review Commission, an elected body of 15 members, passed 10 amendments in expectation of being placed on the November 2026 general election ballot.

In this series, Clark County Today is providing more context on each amendment, including quotes from the sponsor of each amendment.

In this story, we look at 26-20, Limitation on Consecutive Terms for County Council Members.

This amendment was sponsored by Brandon Erickson, chair of the review commission. It passed 9-6.

According to the charter’s description, if passed by the voters, this would establish a limit of three consecutive terms for the members of the Clark County Council.

A person who has served three consecutive terms shall not be eligible to seek election to the county council again until at least one full term has intervened during which that person did not hold the office. (A person who has served three consecutive terms could, in theory, run again after sitting out a term or more.)

Erickson acknowledged that some commissioners could have difficulty with this amendment because it only gives limits to the county council. He said he expects term limit amendments for the executive branch to be brought forward in the future, perhaps as early as next year.

“For commissioners who support broader term limits, Amendment 26-20 is an integral and important first step,” Erickson said.

“This amendment is supported by multiple current and former members of the county council, and that matters,” Erickson said in his statement. “People familiar with the office understand that periodic renewal is beneficial. This amendment strengthens public trust in the council as an institution. This amendment is forward thinking.

“I believe Clark County voters will support this amendment.”

One person in public comment who does not support term limits noted that it had been decades since a councilor served more than three consecutive terms.

Another person, who supports term limits, had a reply to that:

“We want to do that before there is an entrenched incumbent within county government, not wait for there to be an entrenched incumbent and then try to get rid of them,” the person said.

Of note: The meeting on July 8 was to listen to public comment and to vote on the amendments. The sponsor of each amendment gave a brief argument for his or her amendment, but there were no discussions among the commissioners. Those discussions were made in previous Charter Review Commission meetings. In this meeting, it was just a yes or no vote on each amendment.

To see the recap on 26-01, Clarifying Nonpartisan Office Elections, go here: https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/charter-review-commission-amendment-26-01-clarifying-nonpartisan-office-elections/

To see the recap on 26-07, Housing Impact Analysis, go here: https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/charter-review-commission-amendment-26-07-housing-impact-analysis/

To see the recap on 26-08, Requiring Supermajority Council Approval for County Taxes, go here:

To see the recap on 26-08, Requiring Supermajority Council Approval for County Taxes, go here: https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/charter-review-commission-26-08-supermajority-council-approval-for-county-taxes/

To see the recap on 26-10, Revised Budget Transparency and Process, go here: https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/charter-review-commission-26-10-revised-budget-transparency-process/

To see the recap on 26-14, Performance Audits, go here:

Charter Review Commission 26-14: Performance Audits – ClarkCountyToday.com