Uh Carson City uh Charter Review Committee.

It's our second meeting for this year.

The day is uh eight March sixteenth, two thousand twenty-six.

We're in the uh community center Robert Bob Kroll board room.

Uh it's one o'clock.

Uh could we get a uh call to order, please.

Chair Staub.

Present.

Vice Chair Hoffman.

Member Fagan.

Member Hanneman.

Member Hart.

Member Robinson.

Here.

Thank you.

Joe, would you lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance, please?

The public is invited at this time to provide comments on any topic that relates to a matter over which this public body has supervision control jurisdiction or advisory power.

No action may be taken on the matter raised during this period for public comment.

Any public comment?

Okay.

Going on to possible action items, approval of minutes.

Item 4A on page three.

These are the minutes from February 12, 2026.

I suppose everybody's had a chance to review them.

Are there any corrections?

And if not, you'll uh please state them.

And if not, I'll entertain a motion to approve.

Hannah Man, I'm making a motion to approve the minutes, please.

Thank you.

Any discussion?

None of the matters before it.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Thank you.

Item five A.

This is a possible discussion, possible action regarding a recommendation that the Board of Supervisors Board submit to the Nevada legislature a proposed amendment to Article 2, Section 2.050 of the Carson City Charter relating to the frequency of required monthly meetings of the board and the rescheduling of regular meetings that fall on non-judicial day.

Cameron.

Thank you, Chair.

Um so the committee will remember uh our discussion from our February 12th meeting regarding the meeting frequency provision discussed herein um allowing the board to hold at least one regular meeting per month as counties are afforded the same privilege in NRS.

What is new here and which is the product of um our discussions here at the committee level uh is some new language and you'll see that on page 11 of your packet uh is the updated charter amendment.

Um if a regular meeting that is fixed by ordinance falls on a holiday or on a non-judicial day, the meeting may be held on another business day if the minimum public notice requirements set forth in NRS Chapter 241 are satisfied.

That's what's new in the amendment that's in front of you.

Um it is noted in the staff report in your packet that a corresponding Carson City Municipal Code update would be needed in order to square a charter amendment of this kind with the municipal code.

That's been provided for you on page 10, but it is page 11, the charter amendment itself that the committee is reviewing today.

Um the uh ordinance uh or excuse me, the the provision allowing for the uh next non-judicial day or a meeting that is not the next non-judicial day, that just gives the board more uh I would say freedom to reschedule uh meetings without it being just automatically the next judicial day.

That's that's pretty rigid and doesn't give the board any kind of discretion in rescheduling meetings.

So this way, if a regular meeting would need to be rescheduled, the board has more than one option when doing so in terms of picking the day.

And that extra flexibility will also lend itself to the efficiency of government described in the uh staff report you have in front of you.

And I and District Attorney Pruitt are available for questions at this point, but that is a brief overview of what you have in front of you on page 11.

Thank you.

Matters before us, is any member of the committee have any questions for Cameron or the district district attorney hearing none?

Let's see.

What do I remember here when I was on the board?

Having meetings on January 1st.

I believe so.

We had a few on January 1st, I remember.

So but this would allow us not to do that, right?

You are correct.

Thank you.

All righty.

Uh if there's no uh committee comments at this time, is there any member of the public would like to address this uh item 5A on the agenda?

Seeing none of the matters before us, um I would entertain a motion.

I just I just have one question real quick.

Um as far as a number two in that section, it has special meeting may be held by the call of the mayor or a majority of the board.

So if we got rid of that, they got rid of the second meeting.

The if anybody on the board wanted to have a meeting, they have to be in the majority, right?

Or the mayor calls the meeting.

Correct.

To have a second meeting.

That's what would have to happen.

Yes, I think so.

Okay.

That's correct.

That part would remain unchanged.

So just for clarification, so if we changed it to what we only have to have one meeting.

And in order to have a meeting on the first Thursday, either the mayor or majority of the board would have to call meeting.

Garrett approved for the record again.

My understanding is their intention that they'll be having two meetings a month.

The May in there is meant to be a permissive May, so that if there is no need for that second meeting to occur, that they could essentially combine it with another.

But my understanding is the status quo will be that they'll continue to have two meetings per month.

If they needed another one, yes, the mayor could call for that meeting or the board could also determine.

Yeah, we need another one.

Okay.

Thank you.

Entertain a motion.

Wilkie McCullough?

I move a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors submitted to the Nevada legislature.

An amendment to the Carson City Charter as discussed.

Motion do I have second.

Any discussion on the motion?

Matters before us.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, matter carries unanimously.

Moving on to item 5B, page 14 in your packet.

This is uh discussion of possible action regarding direction on future agenda items and meeting dates.

Cameron.

Thank you, Chair.

Um for this item, uh, if the charter review committee has no more business it would like to consider than at this time uh the uh committee's business has concluded and the other meetings that you'll see in your staff report availability dates are no longer needed.

However, I do just want to let the chair and vice chair uh reminder um that following the conclusion of the charter review committee's business, um either the chair or in your case, Vice Chair Hoffman as it was two years ago, um, will go to the board of supervisors in June to present the committee's recommendation.

Um and so that would be the only that does not require a quorum of the charter review committee, and that would be a solo responsibility of either the chair or vice chair depending on uh scheduling and availability, and we can work offline to determine your availability to do that.

But that is the very last thing uh or point of responsibility of the committee following the adjournment of this meeting.

But if there are no more items of business the committee wishes to discuss, then uh this will be our last meeting.

So today would it be our last meeting until one of us has to appear before the board in June?

Correct.

So we would not have the meeting on April 17th or May 16th.

We would not.

Okay, thank you.

Any discussion?

I just have a quick question.

I I'm sure I'm right.

The deadline for public people to present something to propose something to this committee is passed.

You are correct.

Okay.

Any other questions from the committee?

Does this uh if we eliminate these meetings?

Is there a chance something could come up between now and uh May 18th that you might want to reconvene the committee?

Do they have we have that option?

Um I believe the committee would have the option if something did come up, but that would have to, I believe, come at the direction of like the committee members or the chair um at this time uh staff does not have any additional business or uh foreseen problems with uh preparing this for the board in June.

But a district attorney approved can correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe as the as the committee you you do technically have that that ability.

Okay, thank you.

So uh as the as Cameron is noted, we would be canceling the April 17th meeting and the May 18th meeting, and then uh either Ms.

Hoffman or myself will make a presentation to the board uh sometime in June 2026.

So if there's no other discussion for the committee, I'll entertain a motion.

Uh does this require a motion?

Garrett approved for the record.

Are you is the question whether it requires a motion to convene this meeting or to not have the other two meetings?

It would be a motion to to cancel the meeting schedule for April 17th and May 18th, but you don't have any proposed motion on the agenda item.

So I was just wondering whether we need a motion or not.

Garrett approved for the record.

I like safety, so I go with the motion.

Um if you're the motion simply would be to cancel or not hold those other two meetings as there's no further pending business before this board.

Thank you.

So I would entertain a motion to cancel the April 17th and May 18, 2026 meetings of the Charter Review Committee.

Motion do I have second?

Second.

I have a second.

Steve, any discussion on the motion?

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

Aye.

Opposed.

Matter carries unanimously.

I think that brings us to the end of our agenda.

I will again state public comment.

Public is invited again at this time to provide comment on any topic that relates to a matter over which this public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power, including any such matter that is not specifically included on the agenda as action 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 to come before the committee?

Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.

Motion to adjourn?

Do we have a second?

Hanneman's second.

Motion and second any discussion on the motion to adjourn.

Hearing then, all those in favor, please say aye.

Opposed?

Thank you.

We are adjourned.

Thank you all.