The Clark County Board of Commissioners, sitting jointly as the Water Reclamation District Board of Trustees and Liquor and Gaming Licensing Board, met on July 7, 2026, to address a wide range of items including consent agenda approvals, public hearings, and policy discussions. Major topics included the amendment of the Justice of the Peace nominating committee resolution, animal shelter updates, the Tropicana Avenue grade-separated intersection, school traffic safety, and data center regulations. Numerous public comments were heard, particularly on the judicial appointment process and data center expansion.
Good morning. If everybody would like to take their seats. Welcome to the Board of County Commissioners. Today is July seventh, twenty twenty-six. Since coming to Mount Charleston in two thousand, Ray has devoted his career to protecting our forests and keeping our community safe. Many of us also know Ray from his appearances on local news, where he's helped keep the public informed about fire restrictions, wildlife, and recreation in the Spring Mountains. Ray has also been there when our community needed him most, responding to emergencies, helping those in need, and serving as a trusted first responder. In 2017, he received the Braun Smoky Award, the nation's highest honor for wildfire prevention. He was only the second person in Nevada to ever receive this award. Yay. Ray's dedication, leadership, and passion for public service have made a lasting difference in Clark County. Ranger Ray, on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners, thank you for your incredible service. Congratulations on this well-deserved honor, and here's to 25 amazing years. I was going to have him say something. You want to? And all the fantastic people I've got to work with. And in addition, uh we work closely with many of the other agencies, and some of them are Clark County agencies. The relationship we have had with Clark County Fire Department in particular, uh, and their uh rural division of all the volunteer departments throughout Southern Nevada has been fantastic. More recently, we have uh worked really well with the Mount Charleston Fire Department. They are doing a great job. And uh I also have to thank the Clark County uh school district where uh they allowed me to go to the schools and talk to these hundred thousand first and second graders about fire safety. So we have had great relationships with the Clark County agencies and some of the others up at the Mountain Metro, of course. They they always do a fantastic job. So once again, I just want to say thank you, everybody, and I have been blessed to work up at Mount Charleston. And thank you, Ranger Ray, I'm not sure what's the city, and I'm not sure what's the same, and I'm not sure what's the same, and I'm not sure what's the same, and I'm not sure what's the same, and it's a lot of the city of the United States, and the city of the United States, the United States, and the other thing. Please state your name for the record, and you may speak for up to three minutes. Good morning. Good morning, Commissioner Stephanie Phillips, political affairs director with Veterans in Politics. I'm speaking on item 37. I strongly oppose this promote proposed amendment to the resolution because it would allow the board of county commissioners to eliminate the justice of the peace nominating committee and undermine the important role that committee serves in the appointment process. Under this amendment, the board would have the authority to waive the appointment of a nominating committee or any of the procedures established in the June 16, 2015 resolution, and instead fill a judicial vacancy through an undefined alternate process. There are several serious concerns with these proposed changes. First, as written, this amendment effectively gives the board the power to never use a nominating committee again. The language allows the board to waive the committee for good cause. Yet it never defines what good cause means. That standard is far too broad and could be interpreted however the board chooses. If you're worried about time constraints with a vacated seat before you can have time to convene a nominating committee, this is why we have Judge Pro Tems to fill the spot while you're going through the nominating process. Second, the amendment allows the board to waive any procedures established under the 2015 resolution. Again, this language is overly broad and grants virtually unlimited discretion without meaningful standards or accountability. Third, the amendment uh authorizes the board to fill a vacancy through an alternate process, but it provides no explanation of what that process would be. The public deserves to know exactly how judicial appointments would be made before granting any such sweeping authority. The current appointment process was designed to mirror the judicial selection commission. It provides transparency, public participation, and a structured evaluation of qualified applicants. These proposed amendments could eliminate those safeguards entirely. Without a nominating committee, the public may lose the opportunity to provide testimony in support of or opposition to applicants. Taxpayers would lose transparency in a process that directly affects our courts. Most importantly, these changes concentrate significant appointment authority in the hands of a few elected officials without adequate checks and balances. Our system of government works best when there are safeguards against the concentration of power. Judicial appointments should be based on an open, transparent and merit-based process, not one that can be altered or bypassed at the discretion of the board. I respectfully urge each of you to reject these proposed amendments and preserve the integrity, transparency, and accountability of the judicial appointment process.