Editor’s note: In July, the Clark County Charter Review Commission passed 10 amendments to be sent to the voter in the November General Election. One of those amendments was adopted by the Clark County Council, leaving nine to be determined by the voters.
Clark County Today wrote about all of the amendments back in July. In this updated series, Clark County Today is reposting highlights from those reports in July as well as noting some arguments for and against each amendment that appear in the Voters’ Pamphlet.
Proposed Charter Amendment No. 25: Concerning the Requirement of Supermajority Approval by Council 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.
Voters’ Pamphlet Argument for:
“When families and businesses are already paying more for everyday expenses, government should think carefully before asking taxpayers to pay even more.”
“A supermajority requires Councilmembers to work across political lines and build a greater consensus before raising taxes.”
“This does not change any current tax or fee.”
Voters’ Pamphlet Argument against:
“This amendment will not cut your taxes because most taxes are not set by the County Council.”
“A supermajority requirement makes it harder for the Council to fund law and justice which is 73 percent of the county’s budget.”
“The supermajority requirement sounds like a simple two-third rule, but with only five councilors, two-thirds means four out of five, or 80 percent of councilors must agree. Allowing two councilors to control county funding puts public services at risk.”
Here are some of the highlights of what Clark County Today reported in July, when the commission passed the amendment:
John Jay, a commissioner from District 3, sponsored this amendment. It passed by a vote of 8-7.
“Taxation is one of the most important powers entrusted to the government. Every tax … affects families, retirees, workers, and small businesses that call Clark County home,” Jay said. “It influences the cost of living, the affordability of housing, and the confidence people have in their government.”
Jay emphasized that this amendment does not eliminate or change any existing taxes. It simply requires broader approval before asking more from the taxpayers.
Several people took advantage of public comment to address this amendment.
“It will make it harder to conduct the business of the county. It will likely empower a minority vote that will ensure political gridlock,” one said, noting a number of services that taxes fund. “It will make it more difficult for the county government to impose taxes. We live in Clark County because it is a great place to live. Let’s make sure the Clark County Council has the necessary power to keep it that way.”
There were those in favor of the amendment, as well.
Whenever the government asks for more of “your money,” it should not be an easy process, one said.
“We are not against taxes. We’re against extra taxes,” another said, agreeing that it should be more difficult to raise current or enact new taxes.
And another person noted that this would bring more transparency and accountability to local government. If four councilors are needed to pass a tax increase, for example, councilors would likely have to make a compelling argument in a public meeting.
Comments
Loading comments…