The Clark County Charger Review Commission brought 10 amendments up to a vote Wednesday night, and all passed, which means those amendments will be referred to the county auditor for placement on the November 2026 general election ballot

Paul Valencia
Clark County Today

The Clark County Charter Review Commission put up 10 amendments for a vote for 2026, and all 10 passed Wednesday night.

The final 10 amendments that reached the commission’s voting stage will be referred to the county auditor for placement on the November 2026 general election ballot.

That includes such items as requiring a supermajority for the county council to raise taxes or create new ones, term limits for county councilors, and requiring an annual report from the county manager.

Wednesday’s vote does not mean the 10 items will become part of the county charter. It means the public will be voting on each amendment in November, a yes or no vote to determine if there will be changes to the county charter.

“The voters will have a final say,” said Brandon Erickson, chair of the commission.

If 10 amendments in November might seem to be a lot, consider that the commission started with 40 amendments before opting for these final 10 for 2026. The commission will also be meeting to determine amendments to be voted on in 2027 and 2028.

In the coming days, Clark County Today will have larger summaries on each amendment, including quotes from each amendment’s sponsor. For now, here is a synopsis of each amendment and the vote tally from the commission.

26-01: Clarifying Nonpartisan Office Elections. This would require that if there are two or fewer candidates for a nonpartisan county executive or legislative office, they would go directly to the general election ballot, bypassing the primary ballot. Passed 11-4.
26-07: Housing Impact Analysis. This would require Clark County to publish a public analysis of how proposed changes to land use or construction codes could affect land supply and construction costs before adopting any such amendments. Passed 8-7.

26-08: Requiring a Supermajority Council Approval for County Taxes. This would require a supermajority vote of the Clark County Council to enact any new councilmanic tax or to increase the rate of any existing councilmanic tax. Passed 8-7.

26-10: Revised Budget Transparency and Process. This would require earlier and more transparent budget development and publication. It would require at least two public presentations of a preliminary budget earlier in the budget cycle. Passed 12-3.

26-14: Performance Audits. This would make it clear that the county council or legislative branch may conduct a performance audit of county finances or programs to review effectiveness and efficiency. Passed 13-2.

26-20: Limitation on Consecutive Terms for County Council Members. This would establish a limit of three consecutive terms for members of the Clark County Council. Passed 9-6.

26-23: Revised Council Powers Regarding Boards and Commissions. This expands the County Council’s concurrent nomination authority for boards and commissions. Passed 14-1.

26-24: Require Annual Report Publication by the County Manager. This would change language in the charter to say the county manager “must” provide an annual report and “publish broadly” and be made accessible to the general public. Passed 14-1.

26-31: Establishing a Five-Member Ethics Commission. This would increase the number of ethics commissioners from three to five. Passed 13-1, with one recusal. Of note, the Clark County Council is expected to vote on increasing the number of the ethics commissioners from three to five later this month. If enacted, this amendment would not be necessary and would not be on the November general election ballot.

26-40: Amending the Initiative, Mini-Initiative and Referenda Process. This would lower the requirement for verified signatures on an initiative or referendum petition from 10 percent to 8 percent. Passed 12-3.

Before the voting process, Erickson thanked the commission, as well as county staff, for participating “in this important process.”

“Tonight’s votes concern Clark County’s basic governing document, which affects residents directly and indirectly, whether they follow county government closely or not,” Erickson said. “Recommendations to amend the document deserve careful, thoughtful, and deliberate review. I believe this commission has met that obligation.”

The commission started meeting in January.

“Commissioners came here with different backgrounds, priorities, and views about county government,” Erickson said.

The goal, he said, was to work through the differences, respectfully, in a public setting.

“Tonight, the commission can take pride in having reached this point in that spirit,” Erickson said. “As we look forward to our 2027 work, we will be applying the lessons learned in our 2026 work.”

Dozens of people showed up to Wednesday’s meeting. Some participated in public comment. They could choose to speak for up to three minutes at one time on any subject related to the amendments, or for one minute on each amendment.