Charter review commission adopts new study‑committee protocols, forms and sharing rule for legal feedback

The Clark County Charter Review Commission on April 15 voted 14–1 to adopt a package of procedural documents aimed at tightening how proposed charter amendments are reviewed and moved through drafting.

Commissioners approved three items: a revised proposal detail policy form, a new ‘resolution packet’ template for study committees, and updated study‑committee protocols. The documents require sponsors and study committees to include proposed charter language, identify applicable statutes or codes and list impacted departments before the prosecuting attorney’s office will perform a preliminary legal review.

Commissioner Sllamon, who presented the work‑plan subcommittee’s recommendations, said the goal is to give the prosecuting attorney enough context to produce a meaningful preliminary opinion. “The prosecuting attorney needs as much information as possible to form her preliminary legal opinion,” Sllamon said, noting that proposed amendment language or a draft is often essential to begin review.

Katie, the county attorney who advised the commission during the discussion, told commissioners her office’s email responses are preliminary and would remain attorney‑client privileged unless explicitly waived in a public forum. “If we publish them during a public meeting or within the public materials, we have just waived attorney‑client privilege,” Katie said, urging caution and describing how the privileged review functions as an internal check before final drafting.

As part of the motion the commission also amended protocol language so that preliminary opinions from the prosecuting attorney’s office will be distributed to all commissioners simultaneously prior to a vote on whether a study committee’s work should advance to the drafting committee.

The commission set deadlines tied to the decision calendar: study committees that had earlier submitted the older form but lacked sufficient detail were given one week to resubmit on the revised form; items approved to committee at second reading were given two weeks to file the updated form. Commissioners also agreed to adjust the presentation schedule (two committees per meeting) to free time for review by impacted departments and financial services.

The documents approved on April 15 are procedural: they do not change substantive charter text but change the commission’s internal expectations for what study committees must produce before petitions reach the drafting stage. The commission’s chair said the goal is clearer records for drafters and fewer legal surprises at later stages.

Next steps: Sponsors and study committees will resubmit required documentation within the new timeframes so the prosecuting attorney and financial staff can provide preliminary feedback prior to a committee presentation and vote.