Councilor David Madore’s two proposed labor union resolutions, which have incited protests and demonstrations at county meetings for more than a month, appear to have died.
At least for the upcoming collective bargaining session, that is.
Madore publicly brought up the resolutions for the first time since early March during the council’s board time on Wednesday, saying he intended only to move forward with one of them: a resolution that would urge Clark County employee unions to open collective bargaining to the public.
Madore added that he was no longer interested in pursuing a second resolution, which would prevent Clark County unions from compelling workers to pay union dues as a condition of their employment.
The council also alluded to a third resolution, which recently was revealed through public records requests but never posted on the council’s website, The Grid, or discussed in public meetings. The third resolution would have limited what county unions could spend taxpayer dollars on.
The county council has come under fire in recent meetings by dozens of people who accused Madore of union busting for considering any of the resolutions, though none ever appeared on the council’s agenda.
“We listened and respected the feedback that we got by not proceeding on the other ones,” Madore said of the latter two resolutions.
Madore then suggested that the council vote on the proposed resolution regarding public collective bargaining at Tuesday’s council meeting, the same day collective bargaining agreements between the county and its employees are supposed to begin. However, his suggestion was shot down by his fellow councilors.
“I’m not prepared to adopt this as a resolution,” Councilor Jeanne Stewart said. “My fear is it will interfere with negotiations.”
Councilor Tom Mielke suggested that the council vote on the resolution during board time to put the policy in place before Tuesday, but Acting County Manager Mark McCauley warned him that would not provide the public the opportunity to comment on the resolution.
Mielke then said that the resolution, though well-intended, may have the consequence of interfering with negotiations.
“I wouldn’t want to slap anyone in the face with good intentions,” Mielke said.