Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Open Government topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Mesquite mayor backs proposal to remove opening public comment; residents protest

2846264 · February 4, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council discussion and a newly added agenda item would introduce Ordinance 2051 to amend Mesquite Municipal Code Section 165 to remove the opening public-comment period; residents at the tech review meeting sharply disagreed and urged the council to preserve early public comment.

At the Mesquite technical review meeting on Feb. 4, 2025 the council discussed adding to a future agenda the consideration of Bill as Ordinance 2051, which would amend Mesquite Municipal Code Title 1, Chapter 6, Section 165 (Rules of Procedure) to remove the first period of public comment from city council meetings. The mayor acknowledged originating the idea and said state law permits the change, while several residents and council members objected.

Why it matters: Removing the opening public-comment period would change how and when residents can address the council and could affect turnout for community announcements and nonprofit notices often made during that slot.

During the meeting the mayor said, “It was my idea to get rid of the opening public comment... NRS allows for that,” and later acknowledged that Mesquite’s municipal code differs from state law. Residents pushed back. Stephen Clutterham said the proposal is “for shutting people up” and warned the council that taking away the three-minute opening comment would silence constituents who come only to speak briefly. Cindy Delaney said eliminating the early comment period would force small nonprofits and residents to stay for a full meeting to make brief announcements, which she said would discourage participation.

Council discussion included procedural questions about whether the prior omission of opening public comment had been reported to the Nevada Attorney General; one council member recommended the city manager consider self-reporting if a code violation had occurred. The mayor and others noted the difference between compliance with Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) and the city’s own municipal code; the mayor encouraged staff to take steps to reconcile the code with NRS.

Outcome at this meeting: The mayor asked that the ordinance introduction be added to tech review for future consideration; a council member explicitly said “Put it on the agenda.” The transcript shows the item was added for future action, but the record does not contain a final council vote on the ordinance in the provided excerpt.

Next steps: The council will consider the draft ordinance during a future agenda cycle and may receive additional public comment at that time.