Clark County Council to vote on Belkot’s original resolution condemning political violence

The Clark County Council will vote Oct. 14 on Michelle Belkot’s original resolution condemning political violence, including the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

After discussing the original resolution and the modified resolution, the Clark County Council on Wednesday opted to move with a vote on the original draft, a vote that will take place Oct. 14

Paul Valencia
Clark County Today

Michelle Belkot’s original resolution condemning political violence, including the assassination of Charlie Kirk, will get a vote by the Clark County Council on Oct. 14.

The five-member council discussed Belkot’s resolution, as well as an amended resolution, during Council Time on Wednesday.

The amended resolution deleted reference to Kirk as a religious leader. It also added other acts of violence, such as school shootings. In fact, the amended resolution did away with political violence and emphasized violence in all forms.

Belkot expressed her disappointment in the amended resolution, noting that the inspiration for her resolution to condemn political violence came about because of the assassination of Charlie Kirk. She said that this council has passed previous resolutions with naming a specific person.

Last week, the council asked for several edits to Belkot’s resolution, including the assassination of the Hortmans in June, when the Minnesota state speaker of the house and her husband were killed.

The council was given that rewrite late last week, and on Wednesday the council got a chance to discuss the changes.

Councilor Matt Little brought up the motion for the council to vote on the original resolution at the Oct. 14 council meeting. Belkot seconded the motion. Sue Marshall ended up agreeing with Little and Belkot to bring the original resolution to vote on Oct. 14.

How the vote will go in October remains a mystery.

Rob Anderson of Reform Clark County, who was also critical of the changes to the resolution and spoke during Public Comment on Wednesday, was surprised that Marshall agreed to the vote.

He shared his theory:

“She’s either saying this is not the hill I want to die on, or maybe they’ll squash it on the 14th, and she’ll say, ‘You knew there wasn’t support for this, but you moved it forward anyway,’” Anderson said.

It appears two councilors — Belkot and Little — will be in favor of the resolution on Oct. 14. Two others — Glen Yung and Wil Fuentes — seemed uneasy with the original resolution. Marshall did not share her opinions on the matter during Council Time.

For Belkot, her original draft was a simple call to condemn political violence and encourage peaceful ways to work out differences. Earlier this week, she told Clark County Today: “I think the council is complicating things that don’t have to be complicated.”

During discussion on Wednesday, Belkot made her argument.

“Some people perceive attacks or threats as routine, but the assassination and murder of Charlie Kirk is not routine,” she said.

She was disappointed in the removal of the description of Kirk as a religious leader.

“If you watched his speeches at these college campuses, he is clearly speaking about Christ, God, different religions,” Belkot said. “It was a huge part of what he was and what he did.”

Belkot did not appear welcome to accepting the changes to her original draft.

“The original brings us together by condemning Kirk’s killing and calling for peace,” Belkot said. “What was pretty simple, short, and sweet, it was expanded to all these other issues.”

Little was open minded about both resolutions, but if the modified version was accepted, he asked that “religious leader” be returned in the description of Kirk.

Yung said he was “OK” with the majority of the changes, preferring the modified draft.

“I don’t care who it is, I don’t care what their political beliefs are, people should not be murdered based on their political views. Period,” Yung said.

Belkot fought for her draft.

“I would hope that my original, direct, to-the-point resolution that I brought forward would be accepted,” she said.

Little moved to have the original resolution be voted on at the Oct. 14 council meeting. Belkot seconded the motion.

Before voting, Yung and Belkot had another exchange, and Fuentes shared his opinion.

“I feel this could be a chance to promote unity, and it’s missing,” Yung said.

“This is all about unity,” Belkot responded. “It’s talking about peace, unity, no violence.”

“Unfortunately, the politics comes into this. For me, it’s not about one person,” Yung said. “I don’t know why we wish to make it about one person only.”

“This council has been very vocal about condemning political violence,” Fuentes said. “I thank Councilor Belkot for bringing this to our attention, however I will not support the original resolution. I do support the modified version.”

Little pointed out that passing the original version does not deny the council the opportunity to pass future resolutions that do call out other forms of violence.

In the end, Belkot, Little, and Marshall, the Clark County chair, agreed to put the original version to a vote in October.

The discussion came after public comment on the subject.

One homeowner from east Vancouver noted a recent study that showed that more than 60 percent of elected officials in Southern California have had threats made against them.

“I’m here to thank you for your courage to run for office … and to risk your own well being to better our community,” the homeowner told the councilors.

That same homeowner noted, however, that the council should concern itself more with the everyday happenings of Clark County residents and not worry about language in a resolution.

Anderson of Reform Clark County had a different point of view.

“There are times when things are clear and so important to the fabric of our country. You would think this would potentially be a moment for that. This would be a time when those in elected office will do the right thing, … and they’ll speak in one voice in a bi-partisan way: political violence is wrong, and the assassination of Charlie Kirk in no uncertain terms is condemned,” Anderson said during Public Comment.

The vote on Belkot’s original resolution coincidentally falls on Charlie Kirk’s birthday. The Clark County Council had already scheduled a meeting for that day.

“I hope the support can continue in order to make that resolution happen on the National Day of Remembrance for Charlie Kirk, on Oct. 14, 2025,” Belkot told Clark County Today after Wednesday’s Council Time. “That (date) makes it even more significant.”

The United States Senate and House of Representatives voted last week to honor Kirk with the day of remembrance on Oct. 14.