OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Clark County, Nevada/Meeting Portal
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Clark County Board of Commissioners Zoning Meeting - September 16, 2026

Meeting Portal — Wednesday, September 16, 2026
BodyClark County, Nevada
SessionMeeting Portal
DateWednesday, September 16, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:14:50

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it
0:00

Come forward.

0:00

There are three microphones available, including a handheld microphone if you have documents you would like to show.

0:06

If you wish to show a document, an overhead camera may be used at the direction of the board chair.

0:12

Please do not display documents that contain personal or sensitive information.

0:16

When speaking, please talk directly into the microphone clearly and at a steady volume.

0:22

This helps ensure your comments are heard and recorded as part of the public record.

0:26

Speakers are required to state their name, spell their last name, and state their address.

0:31

At the end of the meeting, there is a second public comment period.

0:34

This final public comment is for items not listed on the agenda.

0:38

No action may be taken on those comments at that time.

0:41

All public comments are limited to three minutes unless otherwise announced by the chair at the beginning of the meeting.

0:47

During all public comment periods, board members may listen but are not allowed to respond.

0:52

Thank you for being here and for taking the time to participate in your local government.

1:04

Yeah, we're deleting our lead both our readership the coordinate with public words with fire approval.

1:11

Okay.

3:14

Again, it's just it's like anything.

3:21

Okay, thank you.

3:34

Good morning, everybody.

3:35

Welcome to the continuation of the meeting of the Clark County Commission.

3:39

Today is Wednesday, September 16th.

3:42

I will call this meeting to order and we will begin with the first time set aside for public comment.

3:48

Anyone wishing to speak on items that are on today's agenda can come forward at this time, state your name for the record.

3:58

All right, it's gonna be a good meeting.

4:00

Uh seeing none, we'll close.

4:02

You're coming.

4:03

Come on up.

4:08

And items that are scheduled for routine are four through eighteen.

4:14

If you could just use the microphone to your right.

4:28

Is there an item number that you we can find it if you know?

4:32

It's item numbers fifty sixty six.

4:35

Okay, that those items will be heard separately.

4:37

So if you have a seat, we'll call that item.

4:39

There'll be a presentation and you can speak at that time.

4:42

There is a request to hold up.

4:43

I was trying to.

4:43

I'm sorry, excuse me.

4:44

Fifty-six has is going to be held.

4:46

So it won't be heard today.

4:48

That's what I'm talking about.

4:49

Is you guys have the option to not hold it, and you can go ahead and vote on it.

4:54

And I'm suggesting that you do that.

4:56

This is the fourth time they've held it over.

4:58

So why don't why don't we do this now that we know what you're here for?

5:00

Uh public comments open.

5:02

You can state your name for the record.

5:04

We know you're here to speak on item 56 and make your public comment at this time.

5:08

Uh Russell C strand, I go by Russ.

5:11

Um we feel that the putting six lots on that property is going to negatively impact the uh value of the properties in the neighborhood.

5:24

We're not opposed to development.

5:25

We think it's a great thing.

5:27

Uh we are opposed to banning the rules to allow somebody to put high density housing on in an area where the density of the housing is very uh spread out.

5:40

Can I show you pictures?

5:42

The property across the street.

5:45

These are some of the properties across the street.

5:47

Hold that, will you?

5:52

Not sure the proper orientation for this, but uh upside down, so so you could see it.

5:58

Okay.

5:59

This is uh you can see how far how much empty space there is.

6:04

This is across the street from the proposed property.

6:08

This is another lot next door to that one.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning And Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████46%
Public Works█████████████████17%
Procedural███████████11%
Public Safety██████6%
Affordable Housing█████5%
Religious Freedom████4%
Homelessness████4%
Public Comments███3%
Animal Welfare███3%
Summary of Proceedings

Clark County Board of Commissioners Zoning Meeting - September 16, 2026

The Clark County Board of Commissioners held a zoning meeting on Wednesday, September 16, 2026, at 9:00 AM in Commission Chambers. The meeting covered routine consent items, multiple non-routine public hearings, and introductions of ordinances. Key decisions included approval of an animal resource center, an ice rink facility, a residential subdivision, and several zone changes, while a place of worship was approved but its requested waivers were denied.

Consent Calendar

  • Items 4–18: Routine action items were approved in one motion after staff modifications: added a 15-year discontinuance condition for a use permit and replaced a drainage study condition with an 18-month completion requirement. No public objections were raised.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Russell C. Strand (spelled last name): Opposed item 56 (held). Stated that six lots on 1.62 acres would negatively impact property values and neighborhood character, presenting photos and a petition with over 70 signatures opposing the density.
  • Shirley Seestrand: Supplemented opposition, noting the property is zoned for a maximum of three lots.
  • Speaker on item 33: Requested a hold to October 21, 2026, which was granted.
  • Al Rojas (final public comment): Expressed support for items 60–61 and raised concerns about A-frame signs, homeless encampments, mobile home rent increases, and illegal dumping. Commissioners responded with details on funding for affordable housing ($360 million since 2022) and ongoing efforts.

Discussion Items

  • Items 19–21 (Animal Resource Center): Chris Luhan (TSK Architects) presented a plan amendment, zone change, and waivers for a county animal resource center on 24.15 acres. The proposal included reconfiguring a trail, rezoning from RS-20 to PF, and waiving full off-site improvements. Colin Kavanaugh, representing nearby residents, objected to rezoning the entire parcel, citing lack of justification for future development and inadequate buffers. Commissioners noted the site is county-owned and restricted from residential use. Motion to approve passed.
  • Item 23 (Place of Worship): Applicant sought a use permit and eight waivers on 0.56 acres in RS-20. Public commenter Troy Lang (directly across the street) opposed, citing 120 members with only 12 parking spots, potential overflow, and safety issues. Commissioner Sagerbloom moved to approve the use permit (citing constitutional protections) but deny all waivers due to traffic and parking concerns. Motion passed without prejudice.
  • Item 27 (Ice Rink Facility): Jennifer Lazovich presented a recreational and entertainment facility with two NHL-sized ice surfaces on 7.02 acres. Waiver for EV capable spaces was partially withdrawn; applicant agreed to install eight EV spaces but requested waiver of 26 EV capable spaces. Commissioners approved, noting the shortage of ice time in the county. Director Alswing acknowledged the EV requirement may be excessive and promised review.
  • Items 48–52 (Residential Development – KB Homes): Mark Mohall presented a plan amendment, zone change, and tentative map for 113 single-family lots on 14.92 acres. Public comments from Heidi McKee (30-year resident) and James J. Brown opposed, citing excessive density, inadequate emergency access, and drainage issues. McKee asked to follow the Planning Commission and Town Board recommendations of denial. Commissioners approved, noting buffering and drainage mitigation, and referencing absent Commissioner Jones’ support.
  • Items 53–55 (Office Conversion): Lebanon O’Heaney requested conversion of an existing residence to office use on 0.72 acres. Waivers for attached sidewalk, driveway width, and uniform standards were debated. Public works noted that detached sidewalks are infeasible on Russell Road. Commissioners approved after public works withdrew two conditions (driveway design and unused driveway reconstruction).
  • Items 60–61 (Industrial Yard): Micah Magdaleno requested zone change from RS-20 to IL for a crane company that has operated for 22 years. Waivers included full off-site improvements, gate width, throat depth, and driveway geometrics. Al Rojas spoke in support. Commissioner Sagerbloom moved to approve with condition that waiver 3 (full off-sites) be withdrawn and that applicant work with public works on off-sites. Motion passed.

Key Outcomes

  • Consent Calendar (Items 4–18): Approved by unanimous vote.
  • Items 19–21: Approved.
  • Item 23: Use permit granted; waivers denied without prejudice.
  • Item 27: Approved with withdrawal of waiver 1B.
  • Items 48–52: Approved.
  • Items 53–55: Approved with modifications (public works conditions withdrawn).
  • Items 60–61: Approved with condition to withdraw waiver 3 for full off-sites and coordinate with public works.
  • Items 62–65: Introduced as ordinances; public hearing set for October 7, 2026.
  • Items 56–59: Held without a specific date. Commissioner Segerblum noted awareness of the issue; Commissioner Gibson abstained from voting on the hold due to a conflict of interest.

Meeting Transcript

Come forward. There are three microphones available, including a handheld microphone if you have documents you would like to show. If you wish to show a document, an overhead camera may be used at the direction of the board chair. Please do not display documents that contain personal or sensitive information. When speaking, please talk directly into the microphone clearly and at a steady volume. This helps ensure your comments are heard and recorded as part of the public record. Speakers are required to state their name, spell their last name, and state their address. At the end of the meeting, there is a second public comment period. This final public comment is for items not listed on the agenda. No action may be taken on those comments at that time. All public comments are limited to three minutes unless otherwise announced by the chair at the beginning of the meeting. During all public comment periods, board members may listen but are not allowed to respond. Thank you for being here and for taking the time to participate in your local government. Yeah, we're deleting our lead both our readership the coordinate with public words with fire approval. Okay. Again, it's just it's like anything. Okay, thank you. Good morning, everybody. Welcome to the continuation of the meeting of the Clark County Commission. Today is Wednesday, September 16th. I will call this meeting to order and we will begin with the first time set aside for public comment. Anyone wishing to speak on items that are on today's agenda can come forward at this time, state your name for the record. All right, it's gonna be a good meeting. Uh seeing none, we'll close. You're coming. Come on up. And items that are scheduled for routine are four through eighteen. If you could just use the microphone to your right. Is there an item number that you we can find it if you know? It's item numbers fifty sixty six. Okay, that those items will be heard separately. So if you have a seat, we'll call that item. There'll be a presentation and you can speak at that time. There is a request to hold up. I was trying to. I'm sorry, excuse me. Fifty-six has is going to be held. So it won't be heard today. That's what I'm talking about. Is you guys have the option to not hold it, and you can go ahead and vote on it. And I'm suggesting that you do that. This is the fourth time they've held it over. So why don't why don't we do this now that we know what you're here for? Uh public comments open. You can state your name for the record. We know you're here to speak on item 56 and make your public comment at this time. Uh Russell C strand, I go by Russ. Um we feel that the putting six lots on that property is going to negatively impact the uh value of the properties in the neighborhood. We're not opposed to development. We think it's a great thing.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com