Richard Staub and I am the chairman of the uh charter review committee, and we have a few things to go through.

Um I need to make uh the notice to public at this point or after we do the roll call, Mr.

Brute.

The notice of public at the beginning of our agenda.

You can do that now for I'll do it after we do a call to order and we'll go from there.

So uh would could we do a roll call, please?

Yeah, Chairperson Staub.

Chairman or present.

A vice chair Hoffman.

Member Fagan Member Hanneman, Member Hart, Member Robinson, Member Wilkie McCulloch present.

A quorum is present.

Thank you.

And everyone is here.

So item three on the agenda is public comment.

The public is invited to at this time to provide comment on any topics that relate to matter over which the this public body has jurisdiction, control, supervision, or advisory power, including any such matter that is not specifically included on the agenda as an action item today.

No action may be taken on a matter raised during this period of time for public comment.

Is there any public comment?

Seeing none, we'll go on to item four, possible action approval of minutes of June twelfth, two thousand twenty-four.

Uh they're located on page four and five of your packet.

Has everybody had a chance to review the minutes?

And if so, uh entertain a motion to approve.

If not, if there are corrections, uh, would a member please point those out to staff.

I make a motion to Hanneman.

I make a motion to approve the minutes as read.

Wilkie McCulloch, second.

I have a motion and a second.

Any any discussion on the motion?

Hearing none of the matters before us, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Matter carries unanimously.

Thank you.

We'll move on to item five A.

This is on page nine of your book.

This is possible a discussion and possible action regarding the election of a chair and a vice chair of this committee.

I would entertain a discussion or motion at this time.

I move to appoint Richard Staub as chair.

Second, Hanneman.

Uh all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Matter carries unanimously.

Vice Chair, do we have a nomination?

And nominate Sue Hoffman.

Wilkie McCullough.

We have a uh motion and a second.

Any discussion on the motion?

Hearing none, the matter is before us.

All those in favor of electing Susan Hoffman vice chair again.

Uh please say aye.

Aye.

Madam Carrie, uh matter carries unanimously.

Moving forward to item five B, and uh thank you very much, members of the committee.

Uh five B.

Discussion of possible action regarding the process and timeline for actions that may be taken by the charter review committee in 2026, including identification identification of additional city charter provisions for potential direction on amendatory proposals at future meetings.

This is on page 11 of your packet.

Um thank you, Chair Staub.

Uh Cameron Gresh, Carson City Government Affairs liaison for the record.

Uh according to Article 1, Section 1.090 of the Carson City Charter.

Proposed amendments to the charter must be heard and debated by the committee, which then advises the board of supervisors with regards to the committee's recommendations for amendments to the charter.

Public input for this charter review cycle was solicited January 16th to the 30th, 2026.

Uh the committee received one submission that was not specifically related to amending the charter.

Uh the committee members may identify additional pro uh proposals for consideration in this item.

Thank you.

Is there any member of the committee would like to discuss this item or any items that they might want to add to our duties as we go forward in the coming weeks?

Hearing none, we can proceed.

Going on to item 5C, this is a discussion of possible action regarding a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to amend Article 2, Section 2.180 of the Carson City Charter to one, provide for that the power of the board applies to all animals.

Two, provide that the board may fix impose uh and collect a license fee on animals.

Three, provide that the board may establish an animal shelter, appoint an animal services manager, and prescribe his or her duties, and four remove provisions providing for the capture and disposal of unregistered dogs, the establishment of a pound, appointment of a pound keeper, and related provisions.

This is on page 14 of your packet.

Chair Staub.

Um the committee's May 13th, 2024 meeting, the Charter Review Committee voted unanimously to recommend this amendment to the Board of Supervisors.

Uh at the Board of Supervisors July 18th, 2024 meeting, the board directed staff to retain this amendment language for a future BDR.

Um this particular suggestion was given to us during the 2024 Charter Review Public Engagement Survey.

Uh it was submitted by Supervisor Lisa Shuty.

Uh she identified inconsistencies between the charter's provisions describing its authority and responsibilities in the management of animals and poultry and our actual practices, procedures uh and responsibilities in these managements.

Uh the nomenclature of the city usual utilizes uh along with uh some of the fine language uh has been recognized as being outdated.

Uh and so for that reason, this amendment was submitted uh in 2024, and you are now free to further debate it.

Is there any member of the committee want to uh discuss or debate uh this provision?

And as you pointed out, we've already didn't we go through this the the last time?

Okay, I thought so.

Hearing no discussion, uh is there any I think I should do this.

I is there any member of the public that wants to address this item?

Hearing none, uh the matters before us, I would understand a motion.

Yay or nay.

I guess we're gonna get rid of pound appointment of pound keepers and things like that.

Make sure this applies to all animals.

I think that was an issue last uh two years ago.

Um Susan Hoffman.

Um we liked this last time.

We talked about it at great length and thought it was important, and it was just the lack of a BDR.

The reason it didn't get changed.

So I I say let's try it again.

I move that we send this forward to the Board of Supervisors again.

Is that the motion we're looking for?

Yes.

I have a motion.

Do I have second?

Panamon second.

Animament second.

Any discussion on the motion?

Hearing on the matters before us, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Matter carries unanimously.

Thank you all.

Uh going on to item 50.

Tell me if I'm going too fast, all right.

Item 5D.

Discussion of possible action regarding recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to amend Article 5, Section 5.100 of the Carson City Charter to change the length of time that election records are kept by the Carson City Clerk Recorder from six months to not less than 22 months.

Thank you, Chair Staub.

Uh this one also comes to us from last year, excuse me, last cycles charter review committee.

Um the charter review committee did vote unanimously to recommend this amendment to the board, and the board similarly at its following meeting, uh, voted for staff to retain this for a future BDR.

Um, election returns are not expressly identified as material within the scope of NRS 293.391 subsection one's requirement.

Uh section five.100 of subsection two of the Carson City Charter requires the Carson City Clerk to keep election returns for a period of six months.

Uh but the um NRS superseding language in 293.391 subsection one uh actually requires it to be 22 months, and while this is the practice of the Carson City Clerk Recorder's office to date, uh this uh particular amendment was submitted by Paula Peters via the public engagement process to bring Carson City's charter language in line with the both Nevada revised statutes and actual practices of the Carson City Clerk Recorders Office.

Thank you.

Um I have a question.

Uh we did this before.

What was there some did we not get a BDR like from PK O'Neal or we just missed it?

No, um so last for the 83rd session of the Nevada legislature, the Board of Supervisors drafted and introduced uh Assembly Bill 32, uh, which had to do with conducting a study on the VT railways operations and feasibility.

Um, and so because that was our loan BDR submission that we are free to make by ourselves, that superseded uh the charter review committee's suggestions for that particular session.

But as we approach the 84th session of the Nevada legislature, uh we are free to choose for R1 BDR to be a charter change should the board want to take up any recommendations from the committee.

Okay, because you know, in my uh meetings with PK O'Neal, I know last session he was holding a BDR for you guys, but I I did I didn't find out how it came out, but apparently it he used it somewhere else.

I can okay, great.

Thank you.

Uh any discussion from the committee on this item.

It's been before us before and we pass it before, so don't see any reason not to make uh our charter uh comply or or uh and be in unison with the Nevada revised statutes.

There's no discussion, any discussion from the public.

Seeing none, uh the matters in force, I'll entertain a motion.

Hanneman, I move to recommend to the Board of Supervisors uh an amendment to Article 5, Section 5.102 to change the length of time that electronic returns are sealed and kept by the Carson City Clerk recorder from six months to 22 months.

I have a motion.

Do I have a second?

Sir.

Any discussion on the motion?

Hearing on the matters before us, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Hearing none, the matter carries unanimously.

Moving on to item 5E, discussion and pothesis on page 218 packet.

Discussion possible action regarding a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to amend Article 2, Section 2050 of the Carson City Charter to revise the number of required monthly meetings of the board.

Cameron.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh so this is the first new charter amendment uh that the committee can consider.

Um section 2.050 of the charter currently requires the board to hold at least two regular meetings each calendar month.

However, Nevada revised statutes, particularly 244.085 requires boards of county commissioners to hold at least one regular meeting per month.

And given Carson City's status as a consolidated municipality, uh this amendment uh being proffered by city manager Glenn Martell uh would amend that to allow the Carson City Board of Supervisors to, if it so chooses, hold only one meeting uh per month to uh save staff time uh and consolidate light agendas into one meeting, um thereby reducing overall meeting costs to the cities uh which could lead to efficiencies and cost savings.

Um and I know that uh the language you have in front of you is uh kind of a first draft of what such a charter change might look like, but I know that uh district attorney Pruitt uh does have some comments to make on that district attorney proof for the record.

So in looking at uh the draft language that you currently have before you, um you can see that the the alterations were minor.

One of the things that uh if this commission would like to look or if this committee would like to entertain this item, um there's further research that we would like to do to ensure that this goes exactly as this group would like it to, and as it's intended to.

So my understanding of the provision that's put forth, it's not an idea that all meetings all board of supervisors would would reduce to one meeting per month, they would allow them the option on months where they simply don't have as much on a calendar, so they're not holding one to simply hold one because it requires two.

My understanding is also that their intention is that it would be normally two meetings every month as we currently do, like I said, unless otherwise needed.

However, as it's currently written, if we're looking at that clean copy, it says the board shall hold at least one regular meeting each month and by ordinance may provide for the holding of additional regular meetings.

Um in reviewing that, uh the further research we want to do is it's not our intention that we would want to have to pass an ordinance every time we want to have bimonthly meetings that might be set by resolution at the front end.

So if that is something this this committee is willing to look at or entertain is that the board would be permitted to have just one meeting in a month where it makes prudent sense, then we can provide a better clean copy for this board to consider at a future time.

So you're asking for our our input at this time, correct?

And not wait for the that's correct.

If this board is inclined to um have the this type of change in the charter, then I can ensure that the necessary research is done that this board can have the exact language at a later date to then review and ultimately vote on.

But however, if this if this group is not inclined to alter this in any way, then there's no reason for us to go forward and do additional research to make sure that the language is exactly what is needed to be.

Thank you.

Well, I'm all for efficiency, and you know, I was on the board for eight years, and uh sometimes we had meetings were pretty short.

So I think that uh allowing the board to have that kind of flexibility and have staff uh more time to do things that they need to do.

Uh I'm I think that kind of flexibility promotes efficiency of government.

I'm a big promote proponent of that.

So that's my two cents.

Uh any discussion from the rest of the committee?

I have a question.

So this idea came from city manager Glenn Martell, yes.

And are the members of the board in favor of this?

Have they talked about that at all?

The supervisors?

I have not discussed Garrett Pro it for the record.

I have not discussed the matter specifically with each supervisor, but that is my understanding is that yes, it came from the city manager's office for the purposes of efficiency when necessary.

Any other discussion from the uh from the committee?

Wilkie McCulloch, I have a question too.

So if it gets taken down to one meeting instead of two, then would it be a special meeting if they had two every month?

And who would call that?

Would that still be the mayor that calls the extra meeting?

So that's that's the issue we have with the language.

We don't want it to be a situation where every second meeting is a special meeting.

Um, I expect that uh the resolution or some type of resolution that would be adopted is that they would be holding two meetings per month unless they determine that it was not necessary in that given month.

But the amendment to the charter would allow that type of resolution or ordinance to take effect, whereas currently the requirement is too.

That's what it is.

Good question, Stacy.

Any other discussion?

Any input from the public?

Seeing none, uh the matters before us, I would entertain a on motion on this matter.

Susan Hoffman.

I move to recommend to the Board of Supervisors.

Well, actually, that's not what we're gonna do.

I move that we um send it back to our district attorney and staff to research further.

Is that if it is this board, sorry, if it is uh this committee's intention that it be allowed to be reduced, if that's the direction you want the research to go.

Well, it looks like maybe the committee wants to think about it for a little while, and that'll give us the time to do that, right?

Understood.

Okay, thank you.

So you're gonna do the research?

I will do the research.

If this yes, I'll do the research.

We're not this wouldn't be a vote to adopt this provision as it is, and it can show up on a later agenda item.

Uh, since we're doing that, I don't I don't need a vote on this, do I?

I don't believe you should need a motion on this one to you're not moving to adopt it as it is or deny it specifically.

Perfect.

If anything, uh if the committee wants to move to table it or move this item to a subsequent agenda, you could do that as well or let it pass.

I think we should just move it to the to a subsequent agenda when you guys are ready to go.

Thank you all.

Uh item five Fiscon and possible action regarding recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to amend Article 2, Section 2.100 of the Kurt Carson City Charter to revise the required form and style of proposed ordinances.

Ms.

Cameron.

Thank you, Chair Staub.

Uh on behalf of the district attorney's office.

Uh assistant district attorney DNU has proposed an amendment to Article 2, Section 2.100 of the city charter to revise certain ordinance drafting formalities.

Um, this amendment proposes that an ordinance provide the effective date of an ordinance or individual sections of the ordinance without a specific style.

Whereas Nevada revised statute 244.110 specifically requires the following language.

Quote, this ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after the day of the month of the year, end quote.

Because of the statutory requirement limits the effective date to one single date for the whole of an ordinance, there is no ability currently to implement different effective dates for different sections of an ordinance when it may be more practicable or even necessary to have different implementation dates and times.

You'll see this commonly with Nevada legislature bills.

With this amendment, the city would have more flexibility to implement different effective dates for different portions of an ordinance.

This amendment also proposes to change existing charter requirement of bracketing existing ordinance language intended to be stricken and underscoring or italicizing new ordinance language intended to be adopted by requiring that new ordinance language and amendments to omit existing language simply be set forth in a clear, conspicuous and uniform manner.

Under the existing formalities, the ordinance draft room must manually manipulate text using, for example, Microsoft Word, and is unable to use other methods of adding new or striking existing language by the use of automated software applications such as redlining or other methods, including the use of different colors and text to indicate new language and language to be stricken.

By amending this provision, the manual manipulation of text can be decreased or even eliminated and in turn greatly decrease the amount of time that is spent on the manual formatting and reorganization of ordinance language that can easily lead to typographical errors.

Thank you.

Did you want to have any input, Mr.

Mr.

Pruitt?

For the record, sure.

One of the simple things, I mean, the NOAA legislature and specifically the legislative council bureau utilizes software that allows them to edit and make the changes necessary to statutes in a clear and conspicuous manner to make it easy for the legislators to review and go through the way our charter is written.

We we don't get to use any of those items.

We've even had offer in the past that we could use some of theirs, but it it doesn't work for us at all because of the restrictions that we have.

So the amendment as proposed would allow us to not only adjust the effective dates for certain pieces as the board would like for implementation purposes, but also allow us to utilize technology as it furthest developed to essentially save time and resources and provide a better product to the board and the residents of Carson City.

Thank you.

Well, I can note for having uh prepared a few BDRs.

I certainly don't like to manually manipulate it either.

Uh not that I could afford software that would allow me to do it automatically, but uh like I again I'm a proponent of efficiency in government and and I've been through that, and I I if you can do it a lot easier, that that promotes the efficiency and ease of getting where you need to be.

So that's my two cents.

Any other discussion on the committee?

No.

No, really, not really, unless you know it's time to go ahead and update.

We are in uh brave new world, so I understand.

Any other comments?

Thank you, Ronnie.

Any member of the public have any comments on this proposed item?

Hearing none of the matters before us, uh I would entertain a motion.

All those in favor, please say aye.

We don't.

Oh, I'm sorry.

I would entertain a motion, excuse me.

Okay, I'll do it.

Hanneman, uh, I move to recommend to the Board of Supervisors an amendment to Article 2, Section 2.100 of the Carson City Charter to revise the required form and style a proposed ordinance as discussed.

And that uh Ms.

Hanneman is 2.10.

Excuse me, 2.1 amend amend that to what one zero zero.

Thank you.

Susan Hoffman, I'll second.

I have a motion and a second.

Any discussion on the motion.

Hearing none of the matters before us, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Matter carries unanimously.

Okay.

5G.

Discussion of possible acts regarding direction on future agenda items and meeting dates.

This is page 27 of your book, and I believe there's a proposal there to have a few meetings all on Monday, I believe.

Cameron, you want to talk about it?

Yes, thank you, Chair.

Um, so in order to uh further deliberate and provide to the board uh our suggested changes for a possible BDR uh which would be due in August or September.

Staff have identified some tentative dates in the following months uh on which this room is available to meet in um all of the dates I'm about to read would come with a start time of 1 p.m.

exactly like today.

Uh those dates are for our next meeting uh March 16th and then April 13th and then May 18th, 2026.

Uh the Charter Commute Review Committee may meet on these dates to review proposed amendments and additions on June 15th or on one of the aforementioned meeting dates.

If the committee decides that additional meetings aren't necessary, the Charter Review Committee may meet to finalize any recommendations to the Board of Supervisors.

Thank you.

So we're talking about March 16th, the Monday, April 13th, and Monday, May 18th, and uh Monday.

Uh any discussion from the board from the committee.

I have a question.

Did you just am I understanding this correctly?

On June 15th, we will meet.

Even if we're finished, like if we come back on March 16th and we don't have anything else, we still have to beat on June 16th.

No, if the committee, I apologize.

Uh if Vice Chair Hoffman, if the committee uh in an earlier meeting decides to make its finalizations then the June 15th meeting is not necessary.

June 15th is simply the latest.

The charter review committee could meet to finalize if it does not do so on one of the aforementioned meeting dates.

Beautiful.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other discussion uh from the committee regarding their availability on March 16th, April 13th, and May 18th with an optional date possible, June 15th.

Susan Hoffman.

Um I'm not available April 13th, but something tells me if we met on March 16th, we might be finished.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any further discussion?

Hearing none.

Any discussion for the public?

Hearing none of the matters before us, uh motion.

Susan Hoffman, I move to I'm not sure what I'm doing here.

I move that we approve these dates that we plan our next meeting for Monday, March 16th.

How about that?

Second, Hanuman.

And then we're gonna leave open the 13th and the April 13th and May 18th and schedule it ad hoc.

That's correct.

I can work with um Vice Chair Hoffman and any other members who make sure that should we need to meet after our next meeting of March 16th, that we find a date in April that is not the 13th, that works for everyone.

Works for me.

Any member of the public have any comments?

Hearing none, uh matters in for us, I would entertain a motion.

Oh, I have a motion.

Second.

Uh just for one than one meeting date.

Wilkie McCulloch, second.

Any discussion on the motion?

Hearing none of the matters before us.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Hearing none of the matter carries unanimously.

That brings us to the end of our agenda.

Uh again, public comment.

Public is invited at this time to provide comments on any topic that relates to matters over which this public body has supervision control jurisdiction or advisory powers, including any such matters that is not specific specifically included on the agenda as an action item.

No action may be taken on a matter raised during this period of public comment.

Any public comment uh today.

Hearing none, unless the committee has something else to say, I think we're prepared for adjournment.

I make a motion to adjourn this very fast meeting.

Very efficient.

Efficient governmental meeting.

Didn't want to make it a horse race, but that's fine.

Hoffman second.

Have a motion and a second.

Any discussion on the motion?

Matters before us, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Hearing none, the matter carries unanimously.

Thank you, everyone very much.

All right.

Before you all go.