“I understand that ranked choice voting is a hard concept for people,” said Doug Lasher, the treasurer for the Charter Yes campaign and former charter review commission member. “I don’t think it will be coming back soon.”
Currently, the treasurer, auditor, clerk, assessor, sheriff, prosecuting attorney and five county council seats are elected in a traditional system in which the candidate gaining the largest total vote in the general election wins.
The amendment would have instead created a system in which voters ranked candidates by preference — first, second, third, etc. If there’s no majority supporting a single candidate, the candidate who received the smallest number of votes would be eliminated and those who voted for that candidate would have their votes go toward their second preferences, until one candidate achieves a majority.
The measure would require the Clark County Council to consult with the county’s executive elected officials in a public meeting before hiring a manager.
The preamble would mention that modern Clark County is situated on land once occupied by Indigenous people. It then says, “We acknowledge and honor their rich heritage, culture, and contributions, past and present. We value a vibrant, inclusive and diverse community that fosters peace, mutual tolerance, and respect for each other’s dignity, privacy, freedoms, and responsibilities.”
The measure would require executive elected officials to provide a certified list of senior office employees to succeed them if their positions became vacant. Successors would serve only until the next general election. It would also make clear how vacant county council positions are filled.
The county charter currently doesn’t define how a nonpartisan elected office is filled temporarily if it becomes vacant. State law defines a process for the county council chair to nominate individuals, who are then presented to the council for approval.
The issue would prevent political wheeling and dealing from going on and keeping the process of naming a successor out in the open, said Lasher, who was pleased at Tuesday’s initial results on the measure.
The greater threshold makes it difficult to get initiatives on the ballot since the threshold changes based on how the population changes, said Lasher, expressing disappointment at Tuesday’s outcome.
The measure is a revision from one of the amendments that failed to pass last year. Last year’s amendment would have created a diversity and inclusion office.
While 38.62 percent of voters were supporting the measure as of election night, 61.38 percent were not.
The measure was a long shot, said Lasher.
This is the second time in two years voters considered changes to the county charter. Last year voters approved eight of the nine proposed charter amendments. The county’s next Charter Review Commission will be elected in November 2025.
