Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Meeting Roundup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clark County Fiscal Court approves routine motions, schedules budget first reading
Summary
At its May 13 meeting the Clark County Fiscal Court approved a package of routine motions and transfers, reviewed the treasurer's April report showing about $1.6 million on hand, and set a first reading of the budget for the next meeting before submitting it to DLG.
Get email alerts on the Meeting Roundup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Clark County Fiscal Court on May 13 approved a series of routine motions including budget and cash transfers, bid awards and appointments, and set a first reading of the 2026 budget for the next meeting.
The court accepted the treasurer's April report, which a court member said showed roughly $1.6 million in the county account. The judge said the court plans to present the first reading of the budget at the next meeting and to submit the proposed budget to DLG (Department for Local Government) thereafter.
During the meeting the court approved motions to: authorize a parking parts claim related to motor vehicle revocations (13A); adopt the County Road Cooperative Program resolution for 2026 (13B); approve an agreement amendment extending a compost-related development application (13C); move wastewater project funds into a six-month certificate of deposit (13D); declare park vehicles surplus (13E); approve a state property-access surplus application (13F); authorize rental/reimbursement arrangements for annex courthouse port facilities (13G); appoint Jason Disney to the tax fields board to fill a three-year term (13H); hire Nathan Arrow as a heavy equipment operator (13I/related personnel action); accept the Emergency Management Performance Grant (13J); award a compost facility bid from the packet (13K); solicit bids for a front-end loader for the compost facility; and approve the Clark County Sheriff's 2025 tax settlement.
Most items were moved, seconded and adopted with no recorded opposition in the public transcript. A member questioned one invoice on the bills list that appeared coded to a food vendor and staff said they would investigate and report back.
The court concluded the open meeting business by moving to a closed session to discuss litigation matters.

